Re: Requirements for update languages?

> Or, to put it in more usual terminology, 'additional database executed
> updates' should be seen as a *part of * the users transaction and be
*visible*
> as part those transactions. As an example, see my post some time ago on
how
> referential actions (like 'on delete cascade') should be seen as part of
the
> macro expansion of statements such as DELETE.

Are there any major DB systems that don't work this way?

Incidentally, I think it's useful for the DBMS to view the application tier as a "user of the database". Depending on how slavish the application is to the user's desire, the application may behave like a more responsible "database user" than the "application user" would have. Still, it may be desirable for the database to protect itself from the application, depending on who is accountable for each of them. Received on Sat Nov 16 2002 - 17:36:26 CET