From: "Martijn Tonies" <m.tonies@...>

> Helen,
>
> > >Triggers for integrity ... ouch.
> >
> > Martijn, how do you think we managed before IB introduced formal ref
> > integrity
>
> Almost not at all :) :)
>
> >and Frigidaire invented the washing machine? (Oh to be so young!)
> >
> > :-)
>
> Declarative RI beats triggers anyday, anytime.

Unless there is a bug in the engine that screws up your data when using RI.
<g>

Seriously, besides the argument listed by Alan regarding your statement
about other programs or tools being used to access data, is there any other
reason to use built in RI other than it is there? (Kind of like climbing the
mountain, huh? :)

For me, the thought of an RI bug being introduced in a future version is
more likely (and beyond my control) than a bug in my code that simply loops
through deleting child records when a master record is deleted. I only use
PKs and not FKs and have had no speed problems to date nor any other for
that matter. Lucky? Could be, but I find it far easier to change data
structures, procedures, etc. without having to continually remove and
replace constraints while developing. This process works best for me so this
isn't a blanket call for "Down With RI" or anything like that. I agree with
heLen that RI is a great thing for many reasons and can be used by anyone
who needs or wants it. I just don't think it's a necessity in all situations
other than letting you forego writing some extra code to deal with it
yourself.

My $0.04
Woody (TMW)

----------------------
"To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk."
Thomas Edison