Re: Check for no more than two entries of each value in a column?
From: Shakespeare <whatsin_at_xs4all.nl>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:04:10 +0200
Message-ID: <49e8fce2$0$201$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
ddf schreef:
> On Apr 17, 1:53 pm, Shakespeare <what..._at_xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> Not necessarily. Presume for a moment that members of a nominating
> committee enter the nominations; in that situation the currently
> connected user is NOT the nominator. The procedure, as written,
> accepts both the nominator and the nominee, so it is possible for
> someone else to process a nomination made by a third party.
>
> The materialized view solution is more elegant.
>
>
> David Fitzjarrell
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:04:10 +0200
Message-ID: <49e8fce2$0$201$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
ddf schreef:
> On Apr 17, 1:53 pm, Shakespeare <what..._at_xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> ddf schreef: >> >>> On Apr 17, 12:38 pm, livefreeordie <jpittm..._at_gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>> knip knip >>> With the commit inside the procedure you *should* be able to keep to >>> the two nominations maximum per nominator (of course depending upon >>> how active this nomination process can be with multiple users you may >>> have a few slip through the cracks). >>> David Fitzjarrell >> This could only happen with the same nominator voting in different >> sessions at the same time.... >> >> Shakespeare
>
> Not necessarily. Presume for a moment that members of a nominating
> committee enter the nominations; in that situation the currently
> connected user is NOT the nominator. The procedure, as written,
> accepts both the nominator and the nominee, so it is possible for
> someone else to process a nomination made by a third party.
>
> The materialized view solution is more elegant.
>
>
> David Fitzjarrell
Then these members should be wise enough to enter only two nominations per nominator. Or you should use a real constraint...
Shakespeare Received on Fri Apr 17 2009 - 17:04:10 CDT