|
|
Posted by T.H.N. on 03/29/06 18:58
David Portas wrote:
> Use stored procedures for your updates, inserts, deletes and selects.
> As far as I can see you aren't doing that now. Is there a reason why
> not?
>
> If you use procs then you won't need the triggers, you probably won't
> need two tables and you'll probably see a performance improvement along
> with all the other benefits of procs.
>
> Thanks for including the DDL. Always tell us what version you are using
> as well - it does help.
Thanks for your advice. The reason I used triggers for this is that it was
easier to test approach this out without modifying the existing client
program, which uses a mix of stored procs and direct SQL statements -
something I do need to fix!
Regarding performance improvements - my goal is to make the time it takes
to refresh the client's displayed data set relative to the amount of changes
since the last refresh, rather than the size of the entire set. So I think
I do need an auxillary table as I can't see any other way of logging the
deletions.
I'm using SQL Server 2000, sorry for not including that in my original post!
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|