Subject | Re: [ib-support] About enforcing uniqueness with triggers |
---|---|
Author | Helen Borrie |
Post date | 2002-07-03T11:09:08Z |
At 01:55 PM 03-07-02 +0200, you wrote:
Paradox programmers who think it's a good way to port their old client code
across to server-based processes. Later, when shades fall from their eyes
and they start to understand multi-user and transaction isolation, they
tend to discover that there actually were sound reasons why the database
designers included constraints! <g>
<Moderator hat on>
Can you please do something to avoid send those long "sig" messages? List
protocol (by international convention) says you should keep signoff text to
three lines or less.
<Moderator hat off>
<signs off with four lines of text>
heLen
All for Open and Open for All
Firebird Open SQL Database · http://firebirdsql.org ·
http://users.tpg.com.au/helebor/
_______________________________________________________
>Hello everybody,I think it bubbles up to the surface from time to time, originating from
>
>I keep seeing a common missconception apearing, from time to time, in this
>kind of forums. It is that one could enforce uniqueness of one or more
>fields in a table with triggers instead of a unique key.
Paradox programmers who think it's a good way to port their old client code
across to server-based processes. Later, when shades fall from their eyes
and they start to understand multi-user and transaction isolation, they
tend to discover that there actually were sound reasons why the database
designers included constraints! <g>
<Moderator hat on>
Can you please do something to avoid send those long "sig" messages? List
protocol (by international convention) says you should keep signoff text to
three lines or less.
<Moderator hat off>
<signs off with four lines of text>
heLen
All for Open and Open for All
Firebird Open SQL Database · http://firebirdsql.org ·
http://users.tpg.com.au/helebor/
_______________________________________________________