Re: Packages: Again

On 13 Jan. 2017 00:54, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:

On 01/11/2017 04:12 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:

What aspects / features of packages were the key issues?
>

Unfortunately we didn't get too far into it because the webinar was about
Postgres specifically. That said, I have been doing some followup. Here is
some of it:

because packages[1]

o break the dependency chain (no cascading invalidations when you install a
new package body -- if you have procedures that call procedures --
compiling one will invalidate your database)

o support encapsulation -- I will be allowed to write MODULAR, easy to
understand code -- rather then MONOLITHIC, non-understandable procedures

o increase my namespace measurably. package names have to be unique in a
schema, but I can have many procedures across packages with the same name
without colliding

o support overloading

o support session variables when you need them

o promote overall good coding techniques, stuff that lets you write code
that is modular, understandable, logically grouped together....

So far that's all "that'd be nice, but isn't a technical barrier" stuff.

Package variables for example. When _do_ you _need_ them? For what? (I'm
aware of some uses but "when you need them" helps us not at all).