Re: "We don't do triggers"

"Paul" <paul_at_not.a.chance.ie> wrote in message news:MPG.1a4a622527489cc3989848_at_news1.eircom.net...
>
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu says...
>
>
> > >>1. NO DATA LOADS EVER. Key it through the app ALWAYS. even 10 million
rows.
> > >>2. NO INTERFACES TO OTHER SYSTEMS, EVER. make other systems talk to
the app.
> > >>They both follow logically from this 'design' rule.
>
> > > Makes sense.
>
> > Provided you don't do anything with a database you couldn't do with 3x5
> > cards.
> > Anyone that "needs" Oracle would break such nonsense.
>
>
> Oh dear. I appear to be having a problem with another person whose
> offerings on these newsgroup I normally respect.
>
>
> Are you having an issue with my use of "Makes sense" because you think
> that
>
> a) I think that organising a db that doesn't make use of SP's, Triggers
> &c. is a good thing?
>
> or
>
> b) I agree with Mr. Litchfield that if one doesn't have Triggers, SP's
> &.c, then one has to be very very careful about how one modifies data
> externally to any application that uses this db?
>
>
> I agree with Mr. Litchfield, and that's why I wrote (that what he had
> written) "Makes sense".
>

Couple of things.

1. Don't worry about giving me a title, use of my name is just fine by me.
2. I had rather intended the initial post to be tongue in cheek. It does seem to me that if you place all your integrity constraints in application code then to ensure data consistency *all* requests need to go through the app, however I'd hope that most people would recognize that this is usually hopelessly inefficient for large categories of work, of which data loads and external intefaces are two examples. I really hope that no-one would think that I actually was recommending doing million row data loads though an EJB or a web service. Would they?

-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK