| Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Can a trigger not to be fired by a dedicate user (application)? |
|---|---|
| Author | Helen Borrie |
| Post date | 2005-01-05T03:52:55Z |
At 01:55 AM 5/01/2005 +0000, you wrote:
implement the business rules independently of any client application.
You *can* use triggers to provide an auditing capability (not "monitoring",
though since the context of a transaction is known only to itself - one
transaction can't monitor other transactions). You *can* pick up various
context variables in trigger code and do things with (or about) them, e.g.
set conditions for something like audit logging.
If you ask, could one implement something like what you ask? the answer
would be "Yes", it's not impossible." Only insane.
./heLen
>A trigger is useful to monitor data updating.Nope. It would totally defeat the purpose of triggers, which is to
>However, I prefer a trigger only be "fired" when third party programs
>performing the updating actions but NOT mine.
>
>In MSSQL, it allows an application to set by a name not to invoke
>certain triggers it created.
>
>Is there any simliar mechanism in Firebird?
implement the business rules independently of any client application.
You *can* use triggers to provide an auditing capability (not "monitoring",
though since the context of a transaction is known only to itself - one
transaction can't monitor other transactions). You *can* pick up various
context variables in trigger code and do things with (or about) them, e.g.
set conditions for something like audit logging.
If you ask, could one implement something like what you ask? the answer
would be "Yes", it's not impossible." Only insane.
./heLen