Re: IMPORTANT DEPENDENCIES QUESTION IN ORACLE.

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 08:17:17 -0800
Message-ID: <1070122670.574835_at_yasure>


Ryan wrote:
> its more complex than that since package specs can have seperate
> dependencies from package bodies. DBA_DEPENDECIES will only list objects
> that have dependecies. So your spec might have a dependencies and your body
> does not. So you will need to add code to account for this so your
> dependency tree doesnt have gaps.
>
> I had to write packages,procedures, and function code to a file in
> dependecies order so they could be re-imported elsewhere. Its not that
> simple. I found the utldeptree to be totally worthless. I did it solely with
> DBA_DEPENDENCIES and DBA_OBJECTS(needed this view in case object didnt have
> dependencies so I diff'd it to the DBA_DEPENDENCIES).
>
> It was a real nuissance. I dont have code to tell you a tree, it just writes
> the code out. A tree would be more complicated.
>
> "Lakshmi Jagarlapudi" <jlnarayana_at_comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:GDBwb.226275$ao4.820053_at_attbi_s51...
>

>>Hi Everybody,
>>
>>I have been working in Oracle database for a while. I am actually looking
>>for an easy way to get a dependency tree. I know Oracle
>>provides us with the script "utldtree.sql",however I am not really

>
> succesful
>
>>in using it.
>>
>>To be more clear,  what I want is ,say if there is a package A, which

>
> access
>
>>package B, which access view V which in turn is based
>>on table T. Then I want in a tree like structure the above dependencies

>
> give
>
>>the package A as a parameter.
>>
>>Please let me know if you have any soltution.
>>
>>thanks in advance.
>>
>>

>
>
>

And one should note that the same issue can exist with a TYPE and a TYPE BODY. They can have different dependencies

-- 
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)
Received on Sat Nov 29 2003 - 17:17:17 CET

Original text of this message