Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: Overloading words: How can we get Oracle to stop it?

Re: Overloading words: How can we get Oracle to stop it?

From: Alex Gorbachev <gorbyx_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:40:13 +0200
Message-ID: <c2213f680606101140o44e807dxa3ca189870379444@mail.gmail.com>


Talking about recycle bin.... I remeber I was fixing/cleaning/curing/etc. PC of a teacher at university... I obviously cleaned up recycle bin. Boy what a bolocking I got later... Apparently, she stored there here documents as in archive. :) I hope delevopers will not use recycle bin of 10g in the same way.

2006/6/10, Ghassan Salem <salem.ghassan_at_gmail.com>:
> Guys, when I see this, I remember a quarrel about the recylebin, when it
> appeared. Should the dropped tables appear in user_tables or not? how the
> table in recylebin should be named, .... IMHO, it all comes down to backward
> compatibility, and how to (or not to) preserve it. In the case of
> dba_tab_privs, most probably (I cannot check), when it appeared (may be in
> 7.0), it had only the tables in it. When other objects came along, Oracle
> had to either add a new table, or use this one. If you use the same, can you
> change the column names? it will raise an avalanche of requests to revert
> back as it may break lots of software, if you add a new table, the same
> software will have to be modified to use this new one, ....
> The poor guys (probably they're not poor) at Oracle Labs will have a hard
> time on such things.
> As for the initial email about the 'partition' word. Well, it's meaning is
> adequate in both cases (i.e. table/index partition, and in analytical
> functions), and I've seen lots of Oracle Clients use both without ever
> seeing any problem with this 'reuse'. Also, the analytical functions spec
> were written with IBM's cooperation, so it must have not been easy to choose
> the words for the different clauses.
>
> just my 2cents
>
> On 6/10/06, Nuno Souto <dbvision_at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
> > Mark W. Farnham wrote,on my timestamp of 10/06/2006 4:02 AM:
> >
> > >
> > > And yes, I'm tossing in a huge presumption here that anyone else
> > > actually cares.
> > >
> >
> > Some of us do. My pet peeve is dba_tab_privs and its columns
> > "TABLE_NAME" for a table and a column respectively that store
> > *object* names! Ie, suddenly package, type, sequence and
> > view names are *table names*????
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Nuno Souto
> > in sunny Sydney, Australia
> > dbvision_at_iinet.net.au
> > --
> > http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
> >
> >
> >
>
>

-- 
Best regards,
Alex Gorbachev

http://oracloid.blogspot.com
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Sat Jun 10 2006 - 13:40:13 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US