• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "DB triggers altering the table they are triggered from, bad?"

Collapse

  • BrilloPad
    replied
    I reckon it is okay for some fields. You might want to make sure the time created or updated is filled in. Though for calculations it should be done elsewhere.

    What I think is bad is this - http://forums.contractoruk.com/techn...ers-views.html

    Leave a comment:


  • DB triggers altering the table they are triggered from, bad?

    My DB knowledge is average at best but I have been asked to enhance some current 'functionality' in a system I look after.

    What is there already is a trigger that fires on update of a table which in turn takes the changes, does some extra calculations and then does additional updates.

    Obviously this is a complete hack but i'm thinking this is just something that should not be done.

    The reason I ask is that the triggered updates do not always come out correct.

    DB is Oracle.

    Cheers.
Working...
X