Years ago I wrote an alternate version of DBEXPLAIN and put it in an RL
because we needed functionality that wasn't in the plain vanilla version.
For anyone interested in embedding rules today, the same technique could be
used for DBPUT and DBUPDATE.

Gee ... That kind of has an OO flavor, doesn't it ?

Frank Gribbin
Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP

On Fri, 9 Mar 2001 09:10:34 -0700, Shahan, Ray <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Each and every transaction would not require validation...the only time the
>validation would be called is when the data was changed/added, if the
>transaction was a read or delete, then there shouldn't be any validation
>required.
>
>        -----Original Message-----
>        From:   Frank Gribbin [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>        Sent:   Friday, March 09, 2001 9:49 AM
>        To:     [log in to unmask]
>        Subject:        Re: Expensive RDBM Systems (Oracle)
>
>        The concern about overhead can be allied by placing a binary flag
>        in the IMAGE call, eg
>        1 = validate using imbedded rules and
>        0 = skip validation
>
>        Frank Gribbin
>        Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP
>
>
>        On Thu, 8 Mar 2001 23:19:17 -0500, Doug Werth <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:
>
>        >
>        >This discussion has also revolved around many issues, one being
>        performance.
>        >If Image were enhanced to include data validation, how much
>overhead is
>        >added to each and every transaction? Do the current benchmarks use
>        >previously validated data for input? Would Image truly be able to
>compete
>        >performance-wise if it had to validate each field?
>        >
>        >Theoretically it shouldn't add much overhead overall to an
>application
>        >whether the validation is done in Image or in a program that runs
>on the
>        >3000 when you add the aggregate CPU cost for the transaction
>assuming the
>        >following equation is true.
>        >
>        > App with validation + Image = Thin app. + Image with validation
>        >
>        >
>        >But, if batch input is coming from a front end data entry system
>where the
>        >data has already been validated then Image would just add more
>overhead to
>        >each transaction.
>        >
>        >I'm still "on the fence" on this issue. But I am concerned about
>the
>        >performance impact on existing applications and it should be
>weighed
>        against
>        >the benefits it would provide. A good data entry system will
likely
>be
>        >validating data up front using business rules in a way that can
>very
>        >difficult for DBMS.
>        >
>        >Doug.
>        >
>        >Doug Werth                             Beechglen Development Inc.
>        >[log in to unmask]                               Cincinnati, Ohio