Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: Dynamic SQL to disable constraints.

Re: Dynamic SQL to disable constraints.

From: Joel Garry <>
Date: 23 Sep 2004 10:44:24 -0700
Message-ID: <> (Louis Frolio) wrote in message news:<>...
> (Ed prochak) wrote in message news:<>...

> >
> > This is the way of newsgroups. IF you read the news.newusers posting,
> > then you might know that you should browse a group for a bit before
> > posting. Then you would know the culture of the group. It is not the
> > group's responsibility to find multicultural-acceptable responses to
> > posts. (especially since that may be impossible.) You would also know
> > to search the group for the FAQ to see if it holds the answer to your
> > question. And nowadays with GOOGLE and other search engines, you can
> > search the group to see if your question was answered before.
> >
> >
> > Have you ever dealt with a gruff fellow employee at work? In the
> > market? while driving?
> > Do you really think newsgroups are any different than those other
> > areas of life?
> >
> > Have a nice day, and keep posting.
> > Ed.
> Ed, I applaud you for intervening with a genuine and earnest intent.
> I had put this issue to rest but I am willing to discuss further.
> With that said I would like you to re-read Sybrand's first response to
> my query and in all honesty tell me that he provided a straight answer
> as it pertained to my PL/SQL question. Yes he did indicate that
> "execute immediate" is the way to go and I had tried that (see my
> original post), obviously I had some syntax wrong and I was hoping
> that someone in the group could show me the error. What he should
> have said was that my code was indeed erroneous and I that I needed to
> look more carefully at what I did. As you state "hinted at an
> alternative solution (deferred constraints)" is completely irrelevant
> to my initial query and as far as I am concerned should have been a
> side note to his response if he felt compelled to share his position.
> I have been using News Groups for well over 7 years, do a search on my
> last name and you will find posts dating back to 1997. Throughout
> that time I have been constantly amazed at the overt hostility to
> persons who post what some "perceive" to be stupid questions. Anyone
> who goes to college learns that there exists no such thing as a stupid
> question. Even if someone does post a trite question do others need

I have come to the conclusion that the question answered and not learned from and asked again becomes stupid.

> to flame that person? Doesn't that indeed chew up more bandwidth, the
> very thing the flamers are trying to conserve? With all this said I
> really think that certain people in this newsgroup really need to

Agreed. However, many people have gone on and gone off about this, and it has not changed those people.

> chill out and have more patience with others. Mr. Bakker is very
> knowledgeable, there is no debate here. However, it does not give him
> the right to lash out at people when "he feels" a question or method
> or whatever is irrelevant to him or his cronies. I do not have a
> problem with any of the other posts in this thread, so I am not sure
> why you quoted others. Finally, with all this said I would like to
> challenge all those "aggressive drivers" in this newsgroup to just
> show a bit more compassion and patience with others. If you have
> something to share do it with grace and sincerity.

I sincerely seek your opinion as to whether this is useful:


-- is bogus.
Although, I'm often not graceful.
Received on Thu Sep 23 2004 - 12:44:24 CDT

Original text of this message