Re: Auditing: Trigger or Audit

From: Michel Cadot <micadot{at}altern{dot}org>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:08:28 +0100
Message-ID: <40437b7b$0$22410$626a14ce@news.free.fr>

"Teresa Redmond" <NJZLIRWUWYGI_at_spammotel.com> a écrit dans le message de news:afd4289902170a172b40a4a2f9e36762_at_news.teranews.com...
> Hello all,
>
> I'm spending a lot of time reading and studying, trying to decide
> whether to pursue auditing via the Audit Trail tables or via a trigger
> on the tables that I want to audit.
>
> My question is this: if I have one schema that I would like to audit
> (131 tables and 196000 records, and not a fast growing db), and what I
> want to audit is DML (delete and update only) and who does it, when,
> and from where, am I better off using the Audit Trail or using
> triggers? If I use the Audit Trail can I change it so that it will do
> just what I want, or is this "not good to do"?
>
> I've got lots of example code that I'm trying to follow to do this, I
> just need to know which is the better to do. Thanks so much!
>
> --
> Teresa Redmond
> Programmer/Analyst III
> Anteon Corporation
> tredmond at anteon dot com

imho, if this can be done by the core engine, i use that. If it can't do what i want, i create a trigger.

In your case, you can use:
audit delete, update on <your objects>
and then do something like the following to report:

Column username     FORMAT A11    HEADING User
Column terminal     FORMAT A11    HEADING Terminal
Column owner        FORMAT A10    HEADING Owner
Column obj_name     FORMAT A15    HEADING Object
Column action_name  FORMAT A14    HEADING Action       TRUNC
Column returncode   FORMAT 99990  HEADING RC
Column time_        FORMAT A17    HEADING Time
Select username, terminal, owner, obj_name, action_name, returncode,
       to_char(timestamp,'DD/MM/YY HH24:MI:SS') time_

from dba_audit_object
order by timestamp asc
/

Regards
Michel Cadot Received on Mon Mar 01 2004 - 12:08:28 CST

Re: Auditing: Trigger or Audit_Trail?