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?
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
