Re: [?] Command USE using Oracle db

Igor Damiani wrote:

> <snipped>
>
>I can't understand the reason why other *toys* use similar conventions,
>terminology and terms to describe database's structure, and Oracle not.
>This approach cause more-learning-time in Oracle study, and, IMHO,
>confusion. The concept between Oracle and SQL Server are the same, ok, but
>not words and terms that come used to explain and describe this concepts.
>however, i understand this fact, thanks for explanations about this *my*
>problem.....
>
>good coding!!!
>
>

There are a number of reasons why others use different terminology. But those decisions were all made
by the various vendors back in the 1980s. And for this purpose you can leave SQL Server out because
unlike Oracle, DB2, and Informix ... SQL Server is just a stolen version of Sybase so any differences
from Sybase of of very recent origin.

For you to complain about Oracle being different assumes that you think the others are all the same and
that clearly is not true. Try to find sequences in a database. You'll find them in Oracle and DB2 but not
in Sybase and Informix. So why not spend your time complaining about the fact that Informix and Sybase
didn't follow the convention?

My point, when you get right down to it, is that this is not about your ease of coding. It is abut the vendor's
fiduciary responsibility to their stockholders to make money. Me? I'm perfectly happy with the differences.
I wouldn't want every woman to be like every other woman, every Scotch to taste the same, every glass of
wine to be a Merlot, and in this case, I can pay my bills precisely because of the differences. What a world!

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)