Re: trigger question

parris_at_duart.esp.bellcore.com (Parris Geiser) wrote:

> Chris,
> Let me be more clear. The trigger will be sending something via an alert
> to a PRO*C program. The program will then take some action, like sending
> mail etc. So, here is the point: I don't want the program notified if the
> transaction does a rollback. Got it?
> parris
>

Sorry, didn't get that interpretation when I first read your post. No problem. Did you see Thomas Kyte's reply in this same thread?

<quote>

Have you looked at database alerts (dbms_alert). They are transactional and work somewhat like unix signals. If a trigger fires an ALERT and rollbacks, the ALERT does not get sent. If the trigger fires an ALERT and commits, the alert will get sent. You can use dbms_pipes (to send out large chunks of information) to a process that is waiting for an alert to tell him whether to throw it away or to keep it and process it. Or, you can just use ALERTS (they allow you to send upto 2k of stuff with the event itself).

</quote>

I've always understood that alerts don't 'fire' until commit happens (as Thomas says in the above quote). Are you saying that this is not so?

Am I back in the right ballpark?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Chris Kasten
Programmer/Analyst

#include <std/disclaimer.h>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Received on Mon Apr 01 1996 - 00:00:00 CEST