XPost: comp.databases.oracle.server   
   From: holger.baer@science-computing.de   
      
   Noons wrote:   
   > Holger Baer  wrote in message   
   news:...   
   >   
   >   
   >>This is an excerpt from the docs on my prehistoric 8.0.6 CD for Windows:   
   >   
   >   
   > Yeah, I believe you.  Did a little "digging" myself and found   
   > out.  I'll have to understand why TK is going for FBI rather   
   > than instead of.  Doesn't make sense.   
   >   
      
   I went through chapter 7 of Tom Kyte's book again. It makes perfect sense in   
   the cases he described, because with the trigger you either lock the   
   tables in question, or you end up with constraint violations:   
      
   Session A:   
   insert into view //trigger fires check constraints ok   
   							Session B:   
   							insert into view // trigger fires check   
   									 // constraints ok   
      
   Session A:   
   commit; // trigger does not reevalute constraints   
   							Session B:   
   							commit; // now we violated our constraint   
      
   I don't have the time at hand to check the proposed solution if it   
   behaves any different, but at least this is something to watch out.   
   And it's the reason why Tom chooses FBI over trigger.   
      
      
   Cheers,   
      
   Holger   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)