From: someuser@hotmail.com   
      
   The reason for the package becoming invaild should be logged into the   
   v$errors table as well.   
      
      
   "babu"  wrote in message   
   news:B8gMb.25838$nt4.49443@attbi_s51...   
   > You can try setting the dependencies_mode from time_stamp to signature.   
   >   
   > Babu   
   > "Mark C. Stock"  wrote in message   
   > news:8uWdnQWrp-423GKiRVn-ug@comcast.com...   
   > >   
   > > "Javier Sanchez"  wrote in message   
   > > news:975c1541.0401091432.1f34c849@posting.google.com...   
   > > | Hi all,   
   > > |    I am experiencing a problem whereby a PL/SQL package is valid for   
   > > | some time (and runs succesfully a few times) and then suddenly becomes   
   > > | invalid in DB. If I recompile this package it works again for some   
   > > | time and then again gets invalidated. Does anyone have a suggestion or   
   > > | idea of what might cause such strange behavior?   
   > > |   
   > > | Also, does anyone know a way of obtaining error information from DB   
   > > | that reports why a package was flagged as invalid?   
   > > | Finally, I would appreciate help on how to obtain dependencies (both   
   > > | direct and indirect) for a package? (I read in the documentation that   
   > > | a change in a dependency can cause a package to be invalid)   
   > > |   
   > > | Thanks for your help, regards,   
   > > |   
   > > | -Javier   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > a change in dependencies is the typical reason   
   > >   
   > > use the data dictionary view USER_DEPENDENCIES or DBA_DEPENDENCIES to   
   > > (recursively) examine objects that a package depends on   
   > >   
   > > whenever possible, avoid making changes to the package specification --   
   > only   
   > > work with the package body, this reduces invalidation of dependent   
   > packages   
   > > and procedures   
   > >   
   > > -- mcs   
   > >   
   > >   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)