Re: Why Oracle Enforce Name Uniquness ???!!!

On Nov 6, 5:13 pm, Walt <walt_ask..._at_SHOESyahoo.com> wrote:
> EdStevens wrote:
> > bdbafh wrote:
> >>klabu wrote:
>
> >>>Dang !
>
> >>>why Oracle does not allow a table to have same name as another object type
> >>>???!!!
> >>just use double quotes and mixed case and you'll be fine.
>
> >>-bdbafh
>
> > Therein lies the road to maintenance hell.That's why he's called Bastard Database Administrator From Hell.
>
> I'm sure he's kidding. (or at least I hope so)
>
> //Walt

Yes, I was kidding.
In fact, the use of double quotes and mixed case still doesn't solve his problem.
Ok, wait - that is too general.
It still doesn't get around the uniqueness constraint in his post, it just added case as part of the uniqueness consideration.

Imagine if for resolving every object in the database (e.g. recursive SQL) that instead of for a comparison of owner, object_name and object_type to get the object_id (or data_object_id) only owner and object_name needed to be compared.
That might translate into a more efficient code path (higher tpc numbers).

Its a case of efficiency vs. flexibility. Just use the object_id instead of the object_name and this is a non-issue (albeit a completely non-transportable one unless one were to "synchronize" the object_ids).

emjoy.

-bdbafh

(really, I am just kidding again) Received on Tue Nov 07 2006 - 10:50:01 CST