"Ann W. Harrison" <aharrison@...> wrote:

>
> >Yes, I was thinking about this too. And, generally, I like the idea. I

will

> >definitely support it as soon as someone explains how SPs are going to be
> >serialized in the database.
>
> Serialized?

Stored ;-) I was thinking about serialization (dumping of the object state
in the OO terminology, if my english doesn't fool me) of the execution tree
which is not a language per se but a set of linked nodes.

> > Or do we require the source code
> > to be available and recompile a SP on the first reference?
>
> That's the model I'd expect to see.

At the first glance it seems feasible.

> >This will make lots of people (those hiding their sources
> >in distributed databases) quite unhappy.
>
> Right. And we'll need a solution for that - probably something
> original like a special privilege that allows the procedure to
> be read internally for compilation but not returned to the user.
> Or encryption. What we've got at the moment is barely even
> security by obscurity, given that ISQL will pretty print BLR...

Right. Okay, let's return to this discussion once both FB2 and Vulcan go
into the RC stage...


Dmitry