Would this be surfaced up into SQL DML / DDL?

If so it would be great, we are one of those sites that have a user for each
application & from a connection would be great as would a transaction number
to associate with our replication triggers to apply the replication in
transaction chunks.

JAC.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ann W. Harrison" <aharrison@...>
To: <bpi_opensource@...>; <IB-Architect@yahoogroups.com>;
<firebird-devel@...>
Sent: 18/04/2001 9:28 PM
Subject: [IB-Architect] planning the use of blr codes


> A number of people have asked about adding some
> "built-in" values, including ROLE, TRANSACTION,
> and CONNECTION.
> So, what would the world think of reserving 174 to
> be blr_user_id. That would take a single blr argument
> which would be one of the set
>
> blr_user_transaction
> blr_user_connection
> blr_user_role
> ...
>
> where ... would expand as necessary.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Ann
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>