Path: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!pd2nf1so.cg.shawcable.net!residential.shaw.ca!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: Sybrand Bakker <gooiditweg@sybrandb.demon.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.misc
Subject: Re: How to avoid waiting for locks during delete
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 20:05:40 +0200
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID: <tgp7jvs7c5ipmld1daffoto2aem9fmagng@4ax.com>
Reply-To: postbus@sybrandb.demon.nl
References: <3f339d88$1@olaf.komtel.net> <c7f7jvgu8fp3ri11bastnp9miaecfa9dok@4ax.com> <3f33c687$1@olaf.komtel.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com
Lines: 22
Xref: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com comp.databases.oracle.misc:130384

On Fri, 8 Aug 2003 17:49:23 +0200, "André Hartmann"
<andrehartmann@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>  * If you suggest to lock everything explicitely, that means that when
>issue my delete command i actually have to know all the cascading foreign
>key relations that need to be traced. but i dont (want) to know that. my
>data model will develop and get more enhanced in the future... each time i
>introduce a new foreign key constraint to a base table that is to delete
>cascadingly, i would have to adjust the code around my delete-command to
>make additional locks... thats also unacceptable because its a source of
>errors and iconsistencies.

I don't know what you are talking about. In a properly designed
datamodel that doesn't happen. PERIOD.
If you think otherwise, you have to come up with evidence, and likely
you will show a MESS


Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address