Do I need to deploy Public Synonym in Target Schema?

Hi,
I need to develop and deploy a mapping. I need to use source table in source schema but a Public Synonym for a terget table. This destination table for the public synonym is not target_schema where mapping is to be deployed. Do I still need to deploy the public synonym into my target schema where mapping is or not? I was 3wandering since its a public synonym and the actual destination table is already in database I may not have to deploy this synonym. Thanks for the help in advance..

OWB does not currently directly support public synonyms. You will have to deal with these synonyms outside OWB and if you use the synonym from a mapping you can trick OWB to use it by creating and using a dummy table in the mapping.
Regards:
Igor

Similar Messages

"Loading Public Synonyms" in SYS schema hangs indefinitely

When I try to expand "Public Synonyms" in SYS schema tree, the "Loading Public Synonyms" message window appears and hangs indefinitely without giving any result.
Trying the same in Reports/All Objects/Public Synonyms I get the result within a second.
What's wrong?
I'm running SQL Developer 1.1.2.25.79, Oracle Database 10g R2 (10.2.0.3) on 32-bit RHEL-4.4 AS using Sun jdk1.6.0_01.
N.J.

If you do a select count(*) from dba_synonyms where owner='PUBLIC' you'll get a figure around 20,000 (I get 19697 from a 10.2.0.1 database out of a total of 23992). So, it'll not only take a while to return all the public synonyms but it'll also take a while to sort the output.
However, I've created a test report with the following SQL and it works quickly
select *
from dba_synonyms
where owner='PUBLIC'
I guess it's a bug in SQL Developer - perhaps one of the development team could confirm?

Deploying mappings in non-target schema

Hi,
How can I deploy my mappings in a different schema other than the target schema(where all the target facts/dimensions are present). I want the OWB generated mapping packages in a different schema. How can I accomplish this!!
Thanks,
Srinivas.

Hi Srinivas,
You connect to the runtime repository using the runtime access user.
The you register your factual target users (you now would have 2). Then when you deploy objects to the target locations (a.k.a users) they will end up in that user, not in the stuff you log on with...
If you want to do all of this nicely (just realized that) you should have 2 modules in the design. If you do this you do not need the synonyms..
So you would have a module called packages, a module called schema_objects. Then you have 2 locations related to these 2 modules (package_location and object_location respectively).
When you go to the deployment manager, you will see a tree with package_location and object_location. Click register for those.
Package_location will be user PACK
object_location will be user OBJECTS_HERE
Deploy the lot (packages into PACK of course) and make sure to deploy the connector (this allows OWB to generate the required schema references, replacing the synonyms I suggested before).
Jean-Pierre

Access Views through Public Synonyms

Hi Friends,
I have query need to clear. My current application is running on a schema *(s1)* associated with workspace *(w1)*. Now i have made one more schema *(s2)* in the same workspace *(w1)* where i have to create new tables.
The thing is i want to use few tables column of s1 on s2. What will be the best practice for this. I have made views of columns of s1 schema and now i am thinking to create public synonym in s2 schema to access those views of s1 schema. Just want to confirm any changes or updates made on forms or report made on synonym of s2 will reflect in the base table (which is table of s1). Want to clear the concept of synonym through this. I am sure it will not update the table of s1 schema because i have made synonym of that in my s2 schema and for all page creation i am using objects of s2 not objects of s1.
Would like to hear from you experts on this. If you have some other better soln for this, do suggest me. All my intension is to not update the tables of s1, just to use the required columns of s1 schema objects and use it in s2 schema
Regards
Edited by: User_Apex on Jul 7, 2010 2:21 AM
Edited by: User_Apex on Jul 7, 2010 2:28 AM

Hi,
A synonym just helps you to avoid using the schema name before the object name. If you want to use some columns from tables in s1 just do the following:
1. Create the views
2. Create a role for that privilege (for example: select_s1_role), grant select to this role over the views and assign it to s2.
3. Create the synonym in s2 to s1 views (just to avoid put s1. before the view name).
For the steps above is required that s1 and s2 have the proper system privileges.
Kind regards,

JDev app wizard unable to see public synonyms

When running through reverse engineering to create middle-tier entities/views/assoc/links, the wizard was unable to give me the option of choosing from among public synonyms. I checked under SYSTEM, SYS users but the synonyms I wanted did not appear.
When I created non-public synonyms in a schema, JDev did find them.
PS: The synonyms access tables and views on another server using database links.
null

Are you logging on as yourself or as the owner of the objects? If you are logging on as yourself then you will only see the objects owned/created by you.
If you want to see objects owned by other users click "other users" and click on the user that owns the objects that you want to view. If you do not have 'select' privs on the object then you will not be able to see the object in another users account.

Table based on Public Synonyms

I have 2 schemas and have created public synonyms and given access from the 1 schema to the 2nd schema.
When I create Page / Region of type Report and form (or form) in schema 2, the table name does not accept the public synonyms defined in schema 1. I can create a report region manually using the the SQL Report and select col1, col2 from tab1_of_schema1 but while using the wizard and selecting the table, am unable to use the table ? I even tried schema1.tab1_of_schema1 but it gives " * Table / View does not exist." error. Why is this ?
Is this a limitation ? I do not want to create views and write instead-of triggers.

This was raised during the evaluation of 2.2, and this was the response:
Sorry, don't know if this is already addressed, (but i cannot test this in 2.2, with my scenario, so would appreciate you mention if it is handled). I have 2 schemas, schema1 and schema2. There are tables in schema1 which have public synonyms and grant all access to schema2.
While creating a new application in schema2 and creating Page, we cannot select public synonyms defined in schema1, and have to unnecessarily create views in schema2 (this is not nice for us). Even if view is created, it gives an error saying " Source tables for forms and tabular forms must have a primary key. " why should views have primary key ? Either do not allow views there, or ask for the primary key (like in create region). Sequences defined in schema1(again public synonyms) are not accessible.(we have to write triggers or custom pl/sql for the same).
Response
We do not do very well with objects that are not owned by the schema assoicated with your current application. I have logged an enhancement request for 3.0 to see if we can improve this all around.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DB Links vs. Public Synonyms Security issue

I have been debating on using either a public synonym or a db link for my purpose. I have a dev, test, and prod database. I have applications that have been developed using a public synonym. I know that if I were to switch to db links I would have to go back and change the applications to have access to the tables. I was wondering if it would be more secure to just have the public synonyms with select privilege or have db links. I need to decide if I should use db links for various users in the same DB (e.g. prod) and to use db links from one DB to another. Can someone explain what the security risks are between the two and which would be safer to use?
Thanks

I appreciate that you have taken the time to read my post. The version of the database I am using is 10g. I guess to clarify my post I am asking if someone can provide me advantages and disadvantages of using either public synonyms or db links. I don't know if I am clear, but when I refer to a DB Link I am referring to the following type of access where a client in a database A can access information in a remote database B (e.g. schema1.table2@databaseB). I am not sure what you mean by "Database links are two entirely different technologies that do two entirely different things". But I would appreciate if someone with DBA experience can provide some insight regarding security issues associated with using public synonyms and db links.
Thank you,

DB Link Public Synonym

Hi Guys
I have a public SYNONYM that was created to access a table on the remote database using a DB Link.
We are able to access the DB Link using SQL Plus and the Synonym BUT when the same is used inside the cursor query of a PL/SQL block we get the following error message!
This is driving me crazy... need your expert suggestion :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Errors for PROCEDURE SP_PROCESS_SESEBA031:
59/12 PLS-00341: declaration of cursor 'V_CUR' is incomplete or
malformed
60/9 PL/SQL: ORA-01775: looping chain of synonyms
60/9 PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
95/15 PL/SQL: Item ignored
123/9 PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
124/18 PLS-00320: the declaration of the type of this expression is
incomplete or malformed
127/9 PL/SQL: Statement ignored
127/12 PLS-00320: the declaration of the type of this expression is
incomplete or malformed
148/13 PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
161/37 PL/SQL: ORA-00904: "V_DTL_REC"."TRADE_DATE": invalid identifier
161/37 PLS-00320: the declaration of the type of this expression is
incomplete or malformed
180/9 PL/SQL: Statement ignored
180/53 PLS-00320: the declaration of the type of this expression is
incomplete or malformed
182/9 PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
213/14 PLS-00320: the declaration of the type of this expression is
incomplete or malformed
213/24 PL/SQL: ORA-00984: column not allowed here
Compile source: /usctreg1/app/db/proc/SP_PROCESS_SESECRC.src
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks & Best Regards,
Faisal.

Hi,
As I say, when we access the synonym (that links to a table through a DBLINK) we have this issue. The code can be as simple as
DECLARE
var1 int := 0;
CURSOR S1 IS SELECT col1, col2 from TB_DBLINK;
BEGIN
LOOP through Cursor S1
END;
Here the TB_DBLINK is:
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM TB_DBLINK FOR TB_DBLINK@DBL1
The TB_DBLINK on the DBL1 is also a Public Synonym... So it means that a Public Synonym is being created for a Public Synonym!
Able to access this using SQL Plus simple select though :(

Public Synonyms...

SQL> show user
USER is "SYS"
SQL> select * from dba_synonyms where synonym_name = 'BANK';
OWNER SYNONYM_NAME TABLE_OWNER TABLE_NAME
PUBLIC BANK SEGERP BANK
AMCTESTLHR BANK AMCERPTEST BANK
SQL> conn rakesh/rakesh@testapp
Connected.
SQL> select * from bank;
select * from bank
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00942: table or view does not exist
SQL>
Why Didn't rakesh can access the bank [Public Synonym] It can be accessed by any schema?

Synonyms (public or private) are just aliases for an object. They do not imply permission to use that object for a particular user.
In your case, any user (except amctestlhr) can do select * from bank and get data from segerp.bank provided they are allowed to select from that table. Without the public synonym, all user who had select privilege would need to either create their own private synonym, or do select * from segerp.bank.
John

Dropping public synonyms in a pluggable database

I have an Oracle 12c container database with several pluggable databases in it. In one of the pluggable databases, I de-installed OLAP by running the following scripts:
SQL> @%oracle_home%/olap/admin/catnoamd.sql
SQL> @%oracle_home%/olap/admin/olapidrp.plb
SQL> @%oracle_home%/olap/admin/catnoxoq.sql
SQL> @%oracle_home%/olap/admin/catnoaps.sql
After running the scripts, I then generated the SQL statements to remove invalid OLAP synonyms, by executing the following:
select 'drop public synonym ' || object_name || ';'
from dba_objects
where status <> 'VALID'
and owner = 'PUBLIC'
and object_type = 'SYNONYM'
and object_name like '%OLAP%';
When I execute the resulting SQL statements in the pluggable database, I get the following error for all of them:
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-65040: operation not allowed from within a pluggable database
If I switch back to the CDB$ROOT container and execute the same statements, I get the following error:
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01432: public synonym to be dropped does not exist
How can I remove these invalid public synonyms from my pluggable database?

OK - let's go back to the basics
For 12c you should NOT be manually removing/uninstalling/disabling Oracle options.
There is a CHOPT utitlity specifically designed to enable or disable certain options.
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/install.112/e48740/post_inst_task.htm#CHDFEIJF
5.2.7 Enabling and Disabling Database Options
When you install Oracle Database, some options are enabled and others are disabled. To enable or disable a particular database feature for an Oracle home, shut down the database and use the chopt tool. See Example 5-1.
The chopt tool is a command-line utility that is located in the ORACLE_HOME/bin directory. The syntax for chopt is:
That doc section shows that one of the 'db_option' values available is 'olap' to disable. NOTE: the uttility DISABLES the option. It is still not clear to me why you would attempt to actually deinstall it.
If your concern is licensing then all you need to do is disable it. It is very possible that you have corrupted that PDB by attempting a manual uninstall. Only Oracle support could tell you for sure.
If it is a new PDB and licensing is your issue you may be far better off starting over and using CHOPT to disable the options you don't want.
1. why are you 'unistalling' olap in the pdb? What PROBLEM are you trying to solve?
2. why are you manually dropping synonyms?
3. how did you decide to execute those particular scripts? Is there an Oracle doc you are following that has instructions for deinstalling olap? Does that doc give you the order to execute the scripts in?
If you review the catnoamd.sql script you will see that just about ALL that it does is drop public synonyms.
Most of those synonyms that it drops have 'olap' in the name.
Which suggests that if Oracle wanted those synonyms YOU are trying to drop to be dropped you have to wonder why it didn't drop them itself in that script.
Was that script the FIRST script you executed?
1. Modify your 'drop' script to simply create the DDL to drop the synonyms.
2. Then examine the data dictionary to see what objects those synonyms refer to.
3. Then check if those objects still exist or not
4. Also check those scripts to see if they did anything (e.g. drop) those objects.
Post the results of the above.

F4 describe for packages with public synonyms error

v1.1.0.23 If I hit the F4 key to do a describe for a package that has a public synonym, an error box pops up that says "No valid query. No query found for version of the selected database" . After 5 presses of the OK button, a flyout window displays that contains the package spec.

Hi
I am not sure but maybe you need to use this command:
SQL> insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_TY());
SITA_ADDRESSES_TY() instead SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Regards

Recreation of Public Synonym

Database version 11g. (11.1.0.7)
Please advise. We had a customer at one of our companies that said they were forced to do a "CREATE OR REPLACE" on a couple Public Synonyms this past weekend that was marked as "VALID" according to DBA_OBJECTS. The synonyms and the objects they pointed to were still in existance. They are using an older version of Oracle Forms which stopped working this past weekend. They did a "CREATE OR REPLACE" on the synonym and fixed their problem.
I am trying to think of possible reasons why they would have needed to do the "CREATE OR REPLACE" on a "VALID" synonym. Any advice?
I understand why a synonym can become invalid when the underlying object goes away or permissions change.

Hi,
You can write a script to spool the list of public synonyms.
set feedback off
set trimspool on
set pagesize 1000
set linesize 1000
set heading off
spool public_synonyms.txt
select      'create public synonym ' || table_name || ' for ' || table_owner || '.' || table_name || ';'
from      dba_synonyms
where
     owner='PUBLIC' and table_owner not in ('SYS', 'SYSTEM')
order by
     table_owner;
spool off
exit
Hope it helps.
Regards,
Z.K.

Problem to resolve existing public synonym ?

Hello,
I would like to know if there are some circumstances under which a valid
public synonym on a table still brings up
ORA-00980 (in Oracle Reports).
The situation is this:
We have two main schemas, one is crowded with tables and all stored
procedures, and one with a single but
large table. This table has a public synonym and can be selected from in
SQLPlus and so on. No [schema.] is needed.
But in Oracle Reports, the synonym "cannot be resolved". All other tables
can be selected, but the update on the
special large table failes.
Or is Reports behaving different from SQL*Plus ? One of our developers gave
up using synonyms
and started adding [schema.]table to the statements.
Has anybody here made similar observations ?
I re-created the public synonym last night, because we thought it maybe caused by our
recent db upgrade, but the situation did not change.
What could it be ?
ThanX in advance.
Jan

Jan,
You didn't state what version of the database you are using, nor whether you are accessing the table in the Reports data model or in a PL/SQL trigger. There are known bugs about when accessing a synonym under specific conditions, although a common theme seems to be when accessing from within a PL/SQL block. You should contact Oracle Support and work with them to resolve this issue for your specific situation.
regards,
Stewart

Public Synonyms for Nested Tables - Insertion Problem

Hi,
we are facing a problem during implementation. Our DB set up
is , we will be having two schema named OWNR and COPY.
In the schema, OWNR we have to create all the tables,
types,procedures, packages and obj.....This schema will have
both DDL and DML privileges.
In the schema, COPY we are not supposed to create any tables,
objects. We have to create public synonyms for all the tables,
types, procedures... in OWNR and grant ALL privilege to the
schema COPY.The schema, COPY will have only DML privileges.
The problem is we have some nested tables in our application.
When I try to insert into the synonym which is created for the
nested table, it is not allowing me to insert..The whole
implementation is stucked..Please help.The scripts are given
below.......
We have a type name SITA_ADDRESS_TY which is used by the nested
table SITA_ADDRESSES_NT.Script used for creating the Type,Nested
table,Table, Public Synonym and granting all privilege to these
types and tables are
CREATE OR REPLACE TYPE SITA_ADDRESS_TY AS OBJECT (
SITA_ADDRESS VARCHAR2(10),
REMARKS VARCHAR2(100)) ;
PROMPT SITA_ADDRESSS_NT...
CREATE OR REPLACE TYPE SITA_ADDRESSES_NT AS TABLE OF
SITA_ADDRESS_TY ;
Using this nested table we have created the table,
UMS_SITA_ADDRESS
CREATE TABLE UMS_SITA_ADDRESS (
COMPANY_CODE VARCHAR2 (6) NOT NULL,
AIRLINE_CODE VARCHAR2 (6) NOT NULL,
DESTINATION VARCHAR2 (6) NOT NULL,
SITA_ADDRESS SITA_ADDRESSES_NT)
TABLESPACE EKUMDAT
PCTFREE 5
PCTUSED 40
INITRANS 1
MAXTRANS 255
STORAGE (
INITIAL 64K
NEXT 64K
PCTINCREASE 0
MINEXTENTS 1
MAXEXTENTS 505
FREELISTS 1 FREELIST GROUPS 1 )
NOCACHE
NESTED TABLE SITA_ADDRESS STORE AS UMSNT_SITA_ADDRESS ;
PROMPT SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESS_TY...
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESS_TY FOR SITA_ADDRESS_TY
PROMPT SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESSES_NT...
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESSES_NT FOR SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
PROMPT UMS_SITA_ADDRESS...
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM UMS_SITA_ADDRESS FOR UMS_SITA_ADDRESS
Granting Privileges
PROMPT SITA_ADDRESS_TY...
GRANT EXECUTE ON SITA_ADDRESS_TY TO COPY
PROMPT SITA_ADDRESSS_NT...
GRANT EXECUTE ON SITA_ADDRESSES_NT TO COPY
PROMPT UMS_SITA_ADDRESS...
GRANT ALL ON UMS_SITA_ADDRESS TO COPY
When I connect to copy and desc UMS_SITA_ADDRESS, the structure
is
SQL> desc ums_sita_address
Name Null? Type
COMPANY_CODE NOT NULL VARCHAR2(6)
AIRLINE_CODE NOT NULL VARCHAR2(6)
DESTINATION NOT NULL VARCHAR2(6)
SITA_ADDRESS
OWNR.SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Why is it so??. Even though I have a synonym for
SITA_ADDRESSES_NT, it is not referencing the synonym but instead
refer the OWNR.SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Because of this when I try to insert into ums_sita_address(in
schema COPY), it is giving the following error,
SQL> insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_NT());
insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_NT())
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00932: inconsistent datatypes
But when the same connect to OWNR and try to insert with the
same stmt, it is inserting...
Our middle tier can connect only to COPY schema alone..Is there
anything to be done in the DBA side to achieve this??.
Please help from your valuabe experience...Or can you ask your
collegues if they have got a soln to this probs..Our
implementation team is stucked with this...
Thanks
Priya

Hi
I am not sure but maybe you need to use this command:
SQL> insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_TY());
SITA_ADDRESSES_TY() instead SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Regards

Public Synonyms for Nested Tables - Insertion Problem - Please Help!!!!!

Hi,
we are facing a problem during implementation. Our DB set up
is , we will be having two schema named OWNR and COPY.
In the schema, OWNR we have to create all the tables,
types,procedures, packages and obj.....This schema will have
both DDL and DML privileges.
In the schema, COPY we are not supposed to create any tables,
objects. We have to create public synonyms for all the tables,
types, procedures... in OWNR and grant ALL privilege to the
schema COPY.The schema, COPY will have only DML privileges.
The problem is we have some nested tables in our application.
When I try to insert into the synonym which is created for the
nested table, it is not allowing me to insert..The whole
implementation is stucked..Please help.The scripts are given
below.......
We have a type name SITA_ADDRESS_TY which is used by the nested
table SITA_ADDRESSES_NT.Script used for creating the Type,Nested
table,Table, Public Synonym and granting all privilege to these
types and tables are
CREATE OR REPLACE TYPE SITA_ADDRESS_TY AS OBJECT (
SITA_ADDRESS VARCHAR2(10),
REMARKS VARCHAR2(100)) ;
PROMPT SITA_ADDRESSS_NT...
CREATE OR REPLACE TYPE SITA_ADDRESSES_NT AS TABLE OF
SITA_ADDRESS_TY ;
Using this nested table we have created the table,
UMS_SITA_ADDRESS
CREATE TABLE UMS_SITA_ADDRESS (
COMPANY_CODE VARCHAR2 (6) NOT NULL,
AIRLINE_CODE VARCHAR2 (6) NOT NULL,
DESTINATION VARCHAR2 (6) NOT NULL,
SITA_ADDRESS SITA_ADDRESSES_NT)
TABLESPACE EKUMDAT
PCTFREE 5
PCTUSED 40
INITRANS 1
MAXTRANS 255
STORAGE (
INITIAL 64K
NEXT 64K
PCTINCREASE 0
MINEXTENTS 1
MAXEXTENTS 505
FREELISTS 1 FREELIST GROUPS 1 )
NOCACHE
NESTED TABLE SITA_ADDRESS STORE AS UMSNT_SITA_ADDRESS ;
PROMPT SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESS_TY...
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESS_TY FOR SITA_ADDRESS_TY
PROMPT SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESSES_NT...
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM SITA_ADDRESSES_NT FOR SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
PROMPT UMS_SITA_ADDRESS...
CREATE PUBLIC SYNONYM UMS_SITA_ADDRESS FOR UMS_SITA_ADDRESS
Granting Privileges
PROMPT SITA_ADDRESS_TY...
GRANT EXECUTE ON SITA_ADDRESS_TY TO COPY
PROMPT SITA_ADDRESSS_NT...
GRANT EXECUTE ON SITA_ADDRESSES_NT TO COPY
PROMPT UMS_SITA_ADDRESS...
GRANT ALL ON UMS_SITA_ADDRESS TO COPY
When I connect to copy and desc UMS_SITA_ADDRESS, the structure
is
SQL> desc ums_sita_address
Name Null? Type
COMPANY_CODE NOT NULL VARCHAR2(6)
AIRLINE_CODE NOT NULL VARCHAR2(6)
DESTINATION NOT NULL VARCHAR2(6)
SITA_ADDRESS
OWNR.SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Why is it so??. Even though I have a synonym for
SITA_ADDRESSES_NT, it is not referencing the synonym but instead
refer the OWNR.SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Because of this when I try to insert into ums_sita_address(in
schema COPY), it is giving the following error,
SQL> insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_NT());
insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_NT())
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00932: inconsistent datatypes
But when the same connect to OWNR and try to insert with the
same stmt, it is inserting...
Our middle tier can connect only to COPY schema alone..Is there
anything to be done in the DBA side to achieve this??.
Please help from your valuabe experience...Or can you ask your
collegues if they have got a soln to this probs..We are stucked
with this...
Thanks
Priya

Hi
I am not sure but maybe you need to use this command:
SQL> insert into ums_sita_address values
('EK','EK','DXB',SITA_ADDRESSES_TY());
SITA_ADDRESSES_TY() instead SITA_ADDRESSES_NT
Regards

Do I need to deploy Public Synonym in Target Schema?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for