| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Packages: Again |
| Date: | 2017-01-11 19:54:32 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.20.1701112042300.11499@lancre |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> We have a schemas instead - the PostgreSQL schema is close to Oracle
> packages.
Yes, a schema is a kind of a "namespace"-level package. Pg also has
extensions, which is a group things put together, which may also
contribute to packaging.
> What we cannot to substitute are package variables, now - see my proposal
> for session variables.
I would like also to point out here that Pg has dynamic text session
variables with a horrible syntax, aka user-defined GUCs. They can be the
basis for more useful variables if extended with privacy/some access
control, typing, better syntax, possibly some kind of persistent
declarations, and so on.
> [...]
Good luck with your migration...
--
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2017-01-11 19:54:34 | Re: Packages: Again |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2017-01-11 19:53:07 | Re: merging some features from plpgsql2 project |