| Subject | Re: [firebird-support] is "UPDATE or INSERT" the best way to replicate a read-only local table ever? |
|---|---|
| Author | Helen Borrie |
| Post date | 2011-06-27T22:12:43Z |
At 09:52 AM 21/06/2011, emb_blaster wrote:
(a) what you mean by "his local copy is read-only". Is it a read-only database? Or are you just limiting the write privileges for this user on this table?
and (b) if it is a read-only database, how do you plan to update/insert/delete by any means, whether by ad hoc requests or by a proper replication scheme? Maybe total replacement of the database file at intervals or on request?
./heLen
>Hi,Sorry I don't have the time to help with this right now but, seeing the thread, I wonder --
> Our application work with two databases same time. One in Server, and another local to be used if Our network go off-line. One of the tables hold products information, and his local copy is read-only.
> We are wondering what are the bests ways to update the table (or replicate it, if you prefer this words) with the data from server.
(a) what you mean by "his local copy is read-only". Is it a read-only database? Or are you just limiting the write privileges for this user on this table?
and (b) if it is a read-only database, how do you plan to update/insert/delete by any means, whether by ad hoc requests or by a proper replication scheme? Maybe total replacement of the database file at intervals or on request?
./heLen