Re: Keeping my triggers enabled

"Connor McDonald" <connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com> wrote: <3A070DCF.5DD4_at_yahoo.com> <3A070DCF.5DD4_at_yahoo.com>

> Why not regularly monitor the ability to issue ALTER TRIGGER instead ?

Well, this procedure is mainly created to prevent myself and my collegues from doing anything stupid. I do need the possibility to disable triggers at times. I recall we gave this option some thought, and rejected it. Thinking about it again, I do see some possibilities however.

> If you really do you want to monitor triggers - you'd be better off
> looking at the source tables (not the view) which would be more
> efficient...
>
> You can sleep DBMS_LOCK.SLEEP or host commands to sleep in SQL PLus, but
> I would still recommend preventing the problem rather than reacting to
> it.

Thanks for that. Seems a bit strange to put this in the DBMS_LOCK package but there you go. I am now looping in SQL*Plus, saving the server from loading it every 4 seconds. Also, querying the base tables is a lot cheaper indeed.

I do agree that preventing the problem would be best (and we succeded so far). I am still sticking to my little guard dog though. The output of the triggers is used for a couple of interfaces. If a trigger gets disabled (and we all know that if it can happen, it _will_ happen), we won't notice until the end of the day. By then, it would be impossible to re-create the output.

-- 
Jan

jantah_at_hot.mail.com
... and you know what to do with hot.mail, right ?