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