[DUG] Why InterBase

[Richard Vowles]

Do you mean transactional triggers or the concept of "batch starting
now, batch ending now"? 


---
Richard Vowles, Solutions Architect, Borland New Zealand
email: richard.vowles at borland.com
phone: +64-9-9184573
cell: +64-21-467747
other: MSN richard.vowles at borland.com, skype: rvowles
blog: http://www.usergroup.org.nz/blogs/selectBlog.html?id=39769

-----Original Message-----
From: delphi-bounces at ns3.123.co.nz [mailto:delphi-bounces at ns3.123.co.nz]
On Behalf Of Neven MacEwan
Sent: Thursday, 1 June 2006 2:57 p.m.
To: NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List
Subject: Re: [DUG] Why InterBase

Paul

I didn't say it was efficient :-) Though some could argue that there is
a lot you can do that don't require triggers for ie constraints.

I'd more likely accept the point that mssql does not have row level
triggers, this makes cascading key updates require a cursor in the
trigger yuk!. AFAIK IB doesn't have batch triggers so one could argue
that row level triggers are a lot less efficient in terms of CPU and
memory load than batch ones :-)