RE: "All triggers are evil",..., really?

  • From: "Stephens, Chris" <chris_stephens@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <wbfergus@xxxxxxxxx>, <amar.padhi@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:45:08 -0500

Why not define an adequate api and only allow modifications to the
underlying tables through that api?  Read access could go directly
against the tables.

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill Ferguson
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 7:29 AM
To: amar.padhi@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: "All triggers are evil",..., really?

My system relies heavily on instead_of triggers.

One of the requirements during initial design was that I had to allow
for ODBC connectsions to my database, so users could access the data
with ARC. Since if I allow ODBC, that opens up tremendously what other
kinds of apps could access my database as well. Also, since I have
little to no control over what all of the different PC's are running,
I built most of the logic into the triggers. This was the only way I
could see having all of the business logic accessible to everything,
no matter what application (ARC, Access, Filemaker, etc.) was used to
access and modify the data.

-- 
-- Bill Ferguson
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: 
        This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of 
this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible 
for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is 
strictly prohibited.  If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by email reply.



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

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. oracle-l
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2008