RE: Concept clarification - Invalid packages
- From: <babette.turnerunderwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <GJohnson@xxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:09:58 -0500
You are correct in what is happening for the package compilations.
The argument you are having with the developer is not really
a technical issue but a design issue. I agree with you, but
is there some business reason to return partial data that
the developer did not make you are of ?
And WHY are you changing the package while it is being used ???
- Babette
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Johnson, George
Sent: 2005-01-28 3:56 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Concept clarification - Invalid packages
[snipped]
My understanding, possibly flawed, is that the 2nd SQL, the count()
is forcing the package to stay locked down until the result is =
completely
collated, finally counted and returned, before allow the package to be
manipulated.=20
The first SQL is constantly calling and releasing the package, so at
some point Oracle is allowing the rebuild package to jump in, the split
second it knows the package is no longer locked in use.
Is my thinking correct or have I missed something stupidly
fundamental?
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
