RE: TRIGGERS
- From: "Igor Neyman" <ineyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <davewendelken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 12:44:11 -0400
Oops,
> Um... The pre-insert trigger fires before the insert actually occurs
- so > it won't get the exception. The exception would be caused after
the pre-> > insert trigger is finished. Right?
David, you are right.
Igor Neyman, OCP DBA
ineyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of david wendelken
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 11:25 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: TRIGGERS
>Handle DUP_VAL_ON_INDEX exception in your trigger and loop (get
>sequence.NEXTVAL) untill there is no exception.
Um... The pre-insert trigger fires before the insert actually occurs -
so it won't get the exception. The exception would be caused after the
pre-insert trigger is finished. Right?
The pre-insert trigger can't check the table directly to see if it would
work, because it will get a mutating-table error.
Autonomous transactions might get around the mutating table problem, but
multi-user environments could still cause the error to occur. (Not all
that likely, but possible.)
>BUT,
>The bigger question: is there a valid "business" reason to allow
>"manually created" IDs when you have a sequnce to generate those? I
>think, the problem is in your design.
Yep. Exactly right.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts: