Skip to Main Content

SQL & PL/SQL

Announcement

For appeals, questions and feedback about Oracle Forums, please email oracle-forums-moderators_us@oracle.com. Technical questions should be asked in the appropriate category. Thank you!

Cons of using user defined types as table definitions

Billy VerreynneJul 4 2006 — edited Jul 7 2006
I'm more and more thinking along the lines of introducing a new standard for our developers that all tables must be based on user defined types. E.g. instead of doing the normal create table, you first create a (user defined object) type and then do a create table of type.

There are various good reasons for wanting to do this - 90+% of all the code we write is PL/SQL. A lot of development issues are (very neatly) addressed dealing with object types (aka oo classes) than with %ROWTYPE structs in PL/SQL code.

After all, oo is a proven programming development technology. All the benefits one has in languages like Delphi, Java, C++, C# also applies to using oo in PL/SQL.

What cons do you think there are from a pure RDBMS side in dealing with an o-r table versus a normal table? Not talking about o-r database design specifically (I still favour pure relational designs myself). Simply using oo types (called user defined types or advance data types in Oracle) as the definition of a table. What do you think the cons are? Any practical real world experience out there in this regard?

Thanks.
Comments
Locked Post
New comments cannot be posted to this locked post.
Post Details
Locked on Aug 4 2006
Added on Jul 4 2006
31 comments
1,970 views