Can a procedure contain only a SELECT statement?
in [Oracle]
|
Prev: semvmx
Next: 10.2.0.5 Patchset
From: phil_herring on 22 Mar 2010 19:39 On Mar 23, 8:25 am, Thomas Gagne <TandGandGA...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Programmer appeal is a strength of MySQL. Except for its screwy user > scheme, it's easier to install and manage than either Oracle or Sybase, > and includes many features near-and-dear to programmers. More and more, > programmers are the ones sneaking technologies like PHP, Python, Linux, > and now MySQL thru the IT back door. I haven't heard or read of anyone > sneaking Oracle into a project because it's easy to install, use, > administer, or program. Hmm. I don't wish to offend anyone, by big beef with programmers is that they tend to regard the DB as "part of the application", and make their decisions accordingly. That may well be why they choose products like MySQL when it's simply not appropriate to do so. (Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.) Frankly, I think decisions like "which RDBMS do we use?" are best left to people with a better appreciation of the big picture. They might be an architect, technical manager, DBA, or some combination. But programmers? Sorry, no. There's more to that decision than how it looks to the programmers. -- Phil
From: Bob Jones on 22 Mar 2010 21:05 >>>> Very simple, choices. That is a major advantage. >>> I beg to differ. Some do not need the choice, some are only looking for >>> MS based products, some don't care about the OS... >> >> Saying I don't care about OS is like saying I don't care about cost, >> features, scalability, and so forth. I have no doubt some companies think >> Windows is the best solution for everything - at least M$ is one of them. > > Not at all. Saying one does not care about the OS can also mean that one > is willing to pick the OS after the product one wants to use. With > Windows, Solaris and Linux administrators in house the cost of maintaining > an additional machine with either OS might be identical. Isn't that the benefit of having choices? > But the cost of the application or the choice of applications available > might differ dramatic. For such a company it is a totally reasonable > approach to not look at the platforms something can run on in the first > place but rather on the choice of applications. > Ok, another benefit of having choices. >>> On the other hand, if you need to support multiple platforms you either >>> need to make compromises to be able to adjust your product to all of >>> them - or you need significant more development resources. >> >> Why? Oracle has already done that. You talk to the databases the same way >> across all platforms. > > Do you also administer Oracle the same way on all platforms? Yes for the most part. > Does it have the same performance characteristics on all platforms? No, it may not even on the same platform. Does it need to? > Do all features work the same way on all platforms? Yes, Oracle is platform-independent. I can't say the same about SQL server though. > Is it sufficient to test an application against Oracle on a single > platform? > Err, I will need a crystal ball to answer that one. >>> The sheer number of supported OS to choose from is not a value in >>> itself. >> >> Of course, choice has no value. Scalability has no value. Security has no >> value. Nothing has value. > > I never said that choice or any of the other things you mention has no > value. Why do I get the impression that you intentionally misquote me? > Ok, let me quote you exactly. "The sheer number of supported OS to choose from is not a value in itself."
From: Noons on 22 Mar 2010 21:36 On Mar 23, 8:25 am, Thomas Gagne <TandGandGA...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > In the 21st century, the most expensive component of a system is its > software, and the most expensive component of that is developer time, so > "enterprise" had better find a new meaning. Or had better find cheaper developers, because gthe current crop is waaaaay over-priced... > Programmer appeal is a strength of MySQL. Except for its screwy user > scheme, it's easier to install and manage than either Oracle or Sybase, > and includes many features near-and-dear to programmers. Ease of install has nothing to do with "programmer appeal". > More and more, > programmers are the ones sneaking technologies like PHP, Python, Linux, > and now MySQL thru the IT back door. More and more programmers are being identified as sneaky people. > I haven't heard or read of anyone > sneaking Oracle into a project because it's easy to install, use, > administer, or program. You won't hear of anyone "sneaking" Oracle mostly because it is used in places where responsibility and professionalism are the determinant factors, as opposed to "sneakyness". > My observation regarding Oracle, DB2, Sybase, and SqlServer is the need > to compete for programmer mindshare, Not for "sneaky" developers? > 'cause "enterprise" software is > increasingly more about "enterprise" cost than "enterprise" features, > which if not available today will be tomorrow for much less. What's that got to do with "programmer mindshare" and "sneakyness"? Do you even have a consistent point without changing universe of discourse halfway through a sentence? On second thought, don't bother answering: I'm not interested in your sneaky thoughts!
From: Serge Rielau on 23 Mar 2010 08:49 1. Half of the uses of autonomous transactions I see when enabling Oracle applications wrap DDL statements. 2. If Oracle programmers don't need local temp tables then what is BULK COLLECT, FORALL and INDEX BY all about? They are everywhere! -- Serge Rielau SQL Architect DB2 for LUW IBM Toronto Lab
From: Mladen Gogala on 23 Mar 2010 09:18
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:49:19 -0400, Serge Rielau wrote: > If Oracle programmers don't need local temp tables then what is BULK > COLLECT, FORALL and INDEX BY all about? They are everywhere! Well, we do need them, but we have fancy names for them and a proper dose of disdain for the users of other databases which did not come up with such fancy names for the local temporary tables. Such a common and ordinary name like "local temp tables" shows a worrying lack of imagination and creativity. -- http://mgogala.freehostia.com |