Re: TRICKY TRIGGER QUESTION
Date: 1997/08/18
Message-ID: <871932025.4473_at_dejanews.com>#1/1
Interestingly, Oracle Vs Sybase people can add one more item in favor or Oracle!
Thanks,
Sunil PRajapati
In article <5t1v9n$16r_at_mew.corp.sgi.com>,
pablo_at_sgi.com wrote:
>
>
> In article <33EFF410.1739_at_tiac.net>, "Summit International, Inc."
<summ_at_tiac.net> writes:
> > Pablo Sanchez wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <870965629.3791_at_dejanews.com>, sprajapa_at_fmrco.com writes:
> > > >
> > > > I need to capture primary key changes. Let's say, my update statement
> > > > changes primary key of 10 rows (assumeing primary key as int, values
> > > > 1, 2, 3...10 and new values are 1101, 1102, 1103, ... 1110), then I want
> > >
> > > Doesn't it sound intrinsically wrong to be changing a primary key?
> > > If yur changing it, it ain't primary.
> >
> > Hummm, I didn't expect such reply from you, Pablo, Let's call it "key to
> > identify existing row at given moment" instead of "primary key", now do
> > we have solution ?
>
> Perhaps the tone was off... my apologies if it sounded insolent...
> anyway, the answer is yes, now we have a solution because the primary
> key will not change... the other keys may change but the primary key
> will not, therefore you'll be able to join across the deleted and
> inserted tables.
> --
> Pablo Sanchez | wk: 415.933.3812| pg: 800.930.5635 -or- pablo_p_at_pager.sgi.com
> --------------+-----------------+--------------------------------------------
> pablo_at_sgi.com ... when mailing me, place "not spam" in the Subject
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to UsenetReceived on Mon Aug 18 1997 - 00:00:00 CEST