Niall,
I think I saw a post almost like this a month or so ago and I had a similar
reaction. (It might have been another group) Based upon the responses I
got there the user was determined that they knew better than the database on
how to handle this type of situation.
Jim
--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family. Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign. You can figure
it out.
"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message
news:3e564f52$0$817$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net...
> "Noons" <nsouto_at_optusnet.com.au.nospam> wrote in message
> news:Xns932A1828348D0Tokenthis_at_210.49.20.254...
> > Following up on Andrej Gabara, 22 Feb 2003:
> >
> > Crap! This is PRECISELY why it's a bad idea to have
> > Java people in charge of design!!!
>
> <snip stuff> I very nearly wrote something very similar, but put it down
to
> a Friday afternoon reaction.
>
> If you must have a cache in the middle tier, then either
> pass all database transactions through the middle tier i.e. eliminate
your
> stored procs/loads altogether
> or
> just pass the updates back to the database and let the errors if any
bubble
> back up to your users.
>
> But the strategy of caching data to add speed and then checking if the
cache
> is valid every time you access it is surely going to end in tears.
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> Audit Commission UK
>
>
Received on Fri Feb 21 2003 - 10:34:01 CST
