Re: Do you use PL/SQL

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:03:30 -0700
Message-ID: <1180037011.49030@bubbleator.drizzle.com>

hasta_l3_at_hotmail.com wrote:
> On 24 mai, 17:51, DA Morgan <damor..._at_psoug.org> wrote:

>> hasta..._at_hotmail.com wrote:

>

>>> Daniel, I have to say with Zizag that having to maintain
>>> synchronized a sizeable code base of stored procedures
>>> in three or four dialects is for me a *very* frightening
>>> perspective.
>> Not if done properly?
>>
>> Consider that Oracle supports this very same database on multiple
>> versions of Windows, Linux, Solaris, HP/UX, AIX, etc. And they do
>> it with essentially one code base while taking advantage of those
>> aspects of each that are product specific.

>
> Oh certainly. But Oracle uses portable languages,
> presumably with a tiny layer abstracting os dependencies.

C and Fortran are portable?

But yes ... with a tiny os dependent abstracting layer. Exactly what one can do to access procedures in SQL Server and packages in Oracle.

> However, we are not talking of a small layer here. We are
> talking of essentially three or four re-implementations
> of a medium to large subsystem, where not much can be
> shared since :
>
> * The SP languages are different.

We are talking about far more than that. SQL Server, up until 2005, couldn't even mimic Oracle's MVCC model. Would your solution be to build and drop temp tables in Oracle to mimic SQL Server or to use global temporary tables? Would your solution to SQL Server's row level locking and lock escalation in Oracle be to ...? It isn't just about code.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

Received on Thu May 24 2007 - 15:03:30 CDT