Trigger updating another table
why have it fire and have your logic short circuit it when you could just have it "not fire"??? The Column (optional) Is 2 and 3 available from somehere as opposed to hard coding it?
Tom I remember reading a document in this site about capturing audit information on users that perform a SELECT on restricted columns, but do not remember how I came across. If C was a restricted column containing sensitive data and some one ran the following query, SELECT A, B, C FROM TAB1; then I need to capture the following information: 1.
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER test BEFORE UPDATE OR DELETE ON test FOR EACH ROW WHEN ( NVL (new.user_id, -999999) NVL (OLD.stts_id, -999999) ) Is there any other effective way.
Thanks Koshal In the question I asked, I used the when clause.
Where we are going to update some tables (say T, where Trigger exists) based on PK which we read from a file.
SET_CONTEXT('APP_CTX','FLAG','Y') as very first statement in new Package about to develope.
3) Redefine the trigger as " WHEN (SYS_CONTEXT('MY_CTX','FLAG') IS NULL) " In this way, I am not disturbing the exising application and silently supress the Trigger execution for this new development.
checking is "going to consume some time", absolutely.
(you sort of DO want to do checking, else it would - well - always fire) What I mean is we should have some sort of checking at the statement level itself. update emp set status=nvl(status,'COMPLETE') Looking at the the first statement we know that there is going to be no change to "status".
April 22, 2012 - am UTC you cannot really truly prevent the owner. Never grant anything on that column (do not grant update) Do not put code into the schema owner Lock the schema owner except for upgrades sure, you could use a trigger and make everything slower for everyone (and still not solve the problem, I'm the owner, I'll just disable it).