Go to the FreeLists Home Page Home Signup Help Login
 



[oracle-l] || [Date Prev] [11-2005 Date Index] [Date Next] || [Thread Prev] [11-2005 Thread Index] [Thread Next]

RE: normalization

  • From: "Steve Adams" <steve.adams@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "'stephen booth'" <stephenbooth.uk@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 21:04:47 +1100
Hi Stephen,

That's right, I am just trying to say that using an AFTER ROW trigger
is more efficient than using an equivalent BEFORE ROW trigger.

@   Regards,
@   Steve Adams
@   http://www.ixora.com.au/         - For DBAs
@   http://www.christianity.net.au/  - For all 

-----Original Message-----
From: stephen booth [mailto:stephenbooth.uk@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, 2 November 2005 6:41 PM


On 02/11/05, Steve Adams <steve.adams@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> We got 2 redo records for the BEFORE trigger (but only 1 for the AFTER 
> trigger).
> An extra redo record was needed because the row was locked separately before 
> the
> application of the change vectors for the update.
>

I hadn't been aware of that, I'll try to remember for the future.

Thanks

I take it you're not arguing against the need for a trigger to enforce
the data integrity of calculated fields?

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l






[ Home | Signup | Help | Login | Archives | Lists ]

All trademarks and copyrights within the FreeLists archives are owned by their respective owners.
Everything else ©2007 Avenir Technologies, LLC.