From: Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], dev@archonet.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] proposal for PL packages for 8.3. Date: Tue, 08 Aug
2006 08:18:42 -0400
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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.
Apparently you're not aware that that syntax is not free for the taking.
The reason people are complaining about this proposal is that currently
foo.bar(...) means function bar in schema foo, and you seem to be
intending to break it.
regards, tom lane
I found some doc about it, but I confused. Oracle has two similar kind of
objects: packages and modules. Ansi SQL defines MODULES.
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:jkXyiDKg-sgJ:www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdb/pdf/createmodule_external_routines.pdf+%22CREATE+MODULE%22+sql&hl=cs&ct=clnk&cd=4
Has anybody more documentation about it?
Regards
Pavel Stehule
_________________________________________________________________
Chcete sdilet sve obrazky a hudbu s prateli? http://messenger.msn.cz/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match
