Prev: Multiple selects in one
Next: Oracle 10g on Solaris 10 non-global zones with asynchronous I/O
From: S. Anthony Sequeira on 12 Mar 2010 11:00
jeffchirco(a)gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks for all your feedback. When I was talking about my developers
> I was talking about the .Net developers, so I am being overruled by my
> boss and the .Net team. I am the loan DBA here and I do most of all
> the pl/sql development. The private synonyms option may work for
> certain situations and I'll look into that. Unfortunately we don't
> really have a change control system but I am going to start working on
> one. Another problem is that we write all our own applications so we
> have numerous applications out there and a lot of the users login with
> their own oracle account.

In which case, I'd like add another voice for overloading the procedure,
which was mentioned by Vladimir M. Zakharychev.
--
S. Anthony Sequeira
++
No transfers issued until the bus comes to a complete stop.
++
From: Galen Boyer on 12 Mar 2010 20:15
Shakespeare <whatsin(a)xs4all.nl> writes:

> Op 11-3-2010 6:17, Mladen Gogala schreef:
>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:07:50 -0800, jeffchirco(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> So when my developers need to make a change to a procedure, instead of
>>> just recompiling the procedure they want to create a new procedure named
>>> like sp_procedure2 and then use the new procedure in their application.
>>
>> Have your developers ever heard of something called "versioning system"?
>> There are several of those which are widely used. The names you will most
>> frequently encounter are git, svn and CVS. Those things can really help
>> with versions, branches and revisions. There are also commercial products
>> which do the same thing, but with a better GUI. Personally, I think that
>> GUI is for wimps, especially when it comes to versioning systems. One
>> should learn the CVS syntax by heart and know how to diff, how to see the
>> revision log, check in a new version, merge 2 branches etc.
>>
>>
>>
>
> And I thought SourceSafe was a versioning system....
> Versioning systems won't help if both versions of the procedure must
> be kept in the software

How is this so? This screams multiple branches of the codebase which is
exactly why versioning control is so needed to accomplish this.

> , indeed because other programs may need the old version when they can
> not handle changes made to the original procedure. I agree that
> versioning within the code is not the best way, but sometimes it can
> not be avoided. But the new procedure should not be considered a new
> version, but a complete new procedure, and like �lvaro states, be
> given a new name.

I disagree. Multiple schemas allow the same named objects. Make the
schema name have the branch name and this would work. The issue is that
there is a shared schema of tables. What do you do when the same named
table has a different structure for the different branches? Hm...
Adding new columns is now a subtype table. Removal of columns is a view
that hides the column. Changing names of columns is views.

> If both procedures share a lot of code, the duplicate part should be
> taken out and be programmed as a separate procedure and be called by
> both procedures.

Well, this is exactly what they seemingly are scared to do. Touch the
code.

--
Galen Boyer

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net ---
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Multiple selects in one
Next: Oracle 10g on Solaris 10 non-global zones with asynchronous I/O