Re: ODBC was: Trigger programme without a trigger.

[Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> <snip>
> this is a purely personal decision
> </snip>
>   
That doesn't make it wrong.

I just want to make sure I understand what you're proposing.  Is the 
business logic on the ODBC client?  Or in the trigger program?  Or 
both?  I honestly don't understand what you're proposing.  It makes no 
sense to me.

You can't possibly be saying have the same business rules on two 
machines - not only is it a horrible architecture, but it would go 
completely against your "extra cycles" argument, since the business 
logic would be done twice!

If you're saying it's only on the ODBC client, then you're abdicating 
your business rules to the ODBC client, and you've invalidated the whole 
"trigger protects me from everything" argument.

So what is your design?  Triggers?  No triggers?  Some triggers?

Joe