Re: delete cascade

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 01:01:29 GMT
Message-ID: <JzTWh.116552$aG1.5627@pd7urf3no>

mAsterdam wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:

...

>> Granted, absent any other information, one has no theoretical reason 
>> to favor one update strategy over another, which is why a dbms must 
>> provide some means to express 

>
>
> s/express/accept/
>

>> whatever additional information is necessary to disambiguate the 
>> situation.

>
>
> Most DBMS already have this (accept) capability. The language the user
> or the program uses to interact with the DBMS to access their data
> should provide the freedom to express the usage of these capabilities.
> ...

Being ignorant of most dbms's, I wonder what form this capability takes?   Eg., are you talking of triggered procedures or other procedures of some sort?

One comment of McGoveran's that I remember is that users may need to be aware that they are using a view rather than a base table. Personally, I'd prefer that users see nothing but views but my reasons for that are slim, mainly having to do with preserving unforseen opportunities in the implementation.

p Received on Sun Apr 22 2007 - 20:01:29 CDT