Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> REPOST: Re: Replication / Offline Template instantiation / Sequences

REPOST: Re: Replication / Offline Template instantiation / Sequences

From: Frank van Bortel <fbortel_at_home.nl>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 19:00:09 +0100
Message-ID: <5$--$%%%%--_%_-%_$@news.noc.cabal.int>


Stephen B wrote:
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> I wonder ..what if you explore something along this line of thinking...in
> your main server you issue and maintain the sequence numbers
> on the master table..and remember, I don't know the details of your
> environment but..suppose you only assign "permanent" primary key values
> from the sequence on the server once new records are uploaded from the
> laptops?
>
> In other words, you do pretty much what you're already doing except skip the
> "allocating" of sequence numbers..so, each laptop user refreshes their copy
> of the table
> and sees every record with the primary key value assigned at "head
> office"....when they create a record in the field, their "pending" table has
> all the information but either
> no primary key or a primary key generated by a sequence that is on the
> laptop (via your template)...when the laptop user connects and uploads their
> new records you ignore the primary key (if any) created on the laptop and
> then assign the primary key in the standard way when the records get
> inserted into the master table...
>
> I'm probably not explaining it well, but the idea is you don't worry about
> assigning a permanent primary key value at the time the record is created on
> the laptop,
> only when you get it on the server...

<snipped>
Stephen,

 thanks for looking into this.

Unfortunately, the application is written by a thrid party; I cannot change
the model (and a change it would be; dismissing PK columns, being referenced
by foreign keys on other tables, etc) that much. Would such a rewrite be allowed,
the sequences could all be discarded - unfortunately such a change cannot
be implemented in the timeframe given. What else is new?

-- 
Gtrz,

Frank van Bortel

========= WAS CANCELLED BY =======:
From: Frank van Bortel <fbortel_at_home.nl>
Control: cancel <3C519D29.9B84F544_at_home.nl>
Subject: cmsg cancel <3C519D29.9B84F544_at_home.nl>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 00:31:27 GMT
Message-ID: <cancel.3C519D29.9B84F544_at_home.nl>
X-No-Archive: yes
Newsgroups: microsoft.test,alt.flame.niggers,comp.databases.oracle.server
NNTP-Posting-Host: w088.z064003087.lax-ca.dsl.cnc.net 64.3.87.88
Lines: 1         
Path: news.uni-stuttgart.de!news.fh-hannover.de!feed.news.nacamar.de!news.stealth.net!msrtrans1!msrnewsc1!cppssbbsa01.microsoft.com!tkmsftngp01!tkmsftngp04!u&n&a&c&anceller
Xref: news.uni-stuttgart.de control:40722469

This message was cancelled from within The Unacanceller's glorious new software, Lotus 1-2-3 For Rogue Cancellers.
Received on Fri Jan 25 2002 - 12:00:09 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US