Re: Is SQL*Plus a must...*really*?

In article 325_at_news.nynexst.com, farber_at_nynexst.com (Martin Farber) writes:
>In article 1590_at_iglou.com, proberts_at_iglou.iglou.com (Phil Roberts) writes:
>>shatzman_at_netcom.com (bs) writes:
>>
>>>jl34778_at_corp02.d51.lilly.com wrote:
 

>>>: You can run DESCRIBE from SQL*DBA.
 

>>>Really? I can't in V6 (ORA-900: Invalid SQL Statement). I don't
>>>remember if i've tried in ORACLE7. Has this been added or am i missing
>>>something?
>>
>>I tried it today in 6.0.36 and got an Invalid SQL Statement error. So
>>is it possible in V7?
>>--
>>
>> -------------------------
>> Phil Roberts | proberts_at_iglou.com |
>> -------------------------
>
>
>I don't remember that far back, but in O7 SQL*DBA you *can*
>connect and describe, but don't try and abbreviate because "conn"
>doesn't work nor "descr". That's not including the fact that it is VERY
>unforgiving when it comes to errors. The only way to an editor is to host
>out.
>
>My $0.02 on this thread in general:
>
>o As crude a tool as SQL*Plus is at doing what it does - SQL&DBA is
> some factor WORSE.
>o For an interactive environment for ad hoc queries, simple reports (format-wise),
> dba type tasks, etc - SQL*Plus does the job.
>o I would sooner run UNIX without a shell than Oracle with SQL*Plus - and both

--------->>>> I meant *without* SQL*Plus -- sorry took too many cathode rays!

> make about the same amount of sense!
>
>
>
>---
><<MFF>>
>
>
>-------------------------------------
>
>"Twenty-Five years ago it meant something to be Crazy!"
>
> -- Charles Manson
>
>
>
Received on Thu May 26 1994 - 00:28:59 CEST