I'm glad your curiosity got the best of you ;o)
I was planning to test it out, but didn't have the time to do it. I too, was
very curious as to what the ramifications of dropping the trigger would be in
that scenario. Now, we know :o)
On Monday 24 January 2005 11:07 pm, Jeff Davis saith:
> It got me curious enough that I tested it, and apparently droping a
> trigger locks the table. Any actions on that table must wait until the
> transaction that drops the trigger finishes.
>
> So, technically my system works, but requires a rather nasty lock while
> the transaction (the one that doesn't want the trigger to execute)
> finishes.
>
> Yours doesn't require any special locking, so it seems yours would be
> the preferred solution.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
> On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 13:45 -0500, Terry Lee Tucker wrote:
> > I don't know if droping a trigger inside a transaction will work. Besides
> > that, we want the trigger to do its work in all other circumstances. With
> > a hundred connections on the database, I don't know what kind of issues
> > that would cause if the trigger were there, and suddenly, not there. We
> > figured this was a safe approach.
> >
Work: 1-336-372-6812
Cell: 1-336-363-4719
email: terry@esc1.com
