> What is problem? I can attach table or sequence. What can be problem is
> visibility of nesteded objects (if can be different than functions). My
> proposal is only concept, and I my first goal is find way for secure
> storing session's variables and shared native functions, like my sample. I
> didn't think about others objecst and it's maybe error. Or maybe I was
> wrong in "package is similar to schema". I wonted say so relation between
> function and package is very similar to relation between functions and
> schema.

Having the relationship be similar is fine... actually implimenting
packages as some special kind of schema sounds like a really bad idea.
IMHO, packages should themselves be first-level objects that reside
under schemas. Of course that raises some interesting questions about
the visibility of the functions inside a package, which is why IIRC the
last time this was brought up one of the ideas was to extend schemas so
that they could contain other schemas.

I unlike concept of nested schemats or packages nested in schema. I don't see reason for it. About implementation.. package is more special kind of function for me. But relation between package and function I can create via dot notation in function's name. It's different from nested syntax from PL/SQL or ADA. I can easy separate SQL part and non SQL part.

Pavel Stehule

Najdete si svou lasku a nove pratele na Match.com. http://www.msn.cz/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to