Comments on: PL/SQL post compiler to fix TAPI – dealing with the 'TAPI cannot deal with MERGE' problem https://technology.amis.nl/2005/10/11/plsql-post-compiler-to-fix-tapi-dealing-with-the-tapi-cannot-deal-with-merge-problem/ Friends of Oracle and Java Wed, 08 Jul 2015 07:37:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3 By: Zvonimir https://technology.amis.nl/2005/10/11/plsql-post-compiler-to-fix-tapi-dealing-with-the-tapi-cannot-deal-with-merge-problem/#comment-2514 Sun, 18 Jun 2006 13:28:23 +0000 /?p=842#comment-2514 Hi, Lucas
Thank you for this nice solution, after some tuning it works nice. I would just like to inform you about some problems with code;
1. In case of large triggers (BUR I BIR triggers generated for tables with more than 25 columns) code of trigger is truncated and unusable. I solved this using dbms_lob.substr and dbms_sql.parse
2. In case of tables with large names(29,30 characters ) solution does not works because you does not pay attention to truncate table name with which your are trying to find package definition dbms_metadata.get_ddl(‘PACKAGE’,’CG$’||p_tbl_name,USER);
3. Same problem apply to trigger names.

]]>
By: Lucas Jellema https://technology.amis.nl/2005/10/11/plsql-post-compiler-to-fix-tapi-dealing-with-the-tapi-cannot-deal-with-merge-problem/#comment-2513 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 07:44:55 +0000 /?p=842#comment-2513 I am pretty sure it will – there is no real difference at all between the Designer 6i and 9i products. Nor will there be between the generated TAPI code in these two releases.

]]>
By: Andre Crone https://technology.amis.nl/2005/10/11/plsql-post-compiler-to-fix-tapi-dealing-with-the-tapi-cannot-deal-with-merge-problem/#comment-2512 Mon, 02 Jan 2006 06:58:51 +0000 /?p=842#comment-2512 Lucs, this is great and I need it! Do you have any idea it this also works with designer 6i TAPIs?

]]>
By: Jim Hudson https://technology.amis.nl/2005/10/11/plsql-post-compiler-to-fix-tapi-dealing-with-the-tapi-cannot-deal-with-merge-problem/#comment-2511 Tue, 11 Oct 2005 20:41:07 +0000 /?p=842#comment-2511 Lucas, this is nice work. I like the use of dbms_metadata. A couple minor code tweaks: your package spec in the source claims to be the “body”. And in 9.2 (where we are) dbms_metadata.set_transform_param doesn’t have an “object type” parameter. I’ve compiled it here, but haven’t tried to use it for anything real yet.

]]>