RE: Trigger Question

I can't imagine blasting off a delayed 30-second job after each trigger makes sense :-)

Trust the NEP. I am your father :-)

Oh, sorry slipped into Star Wars mode. What can I say. I am a product of the 70's.

Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
Where Information Meets Innovation
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site: http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT
----------------------------------------------------------------------

message: 1
date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:37:32 +0000
from: "Harman, Roger" <Roger.Harman@xxxxxxxxxx>
subject: RE: Trigger Question

It sounded like they didn't trust NEP's since that is what they are trying to double check. At least, that was my inference.


-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Schoen
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 6:10 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Trigger Question

Have you thought of:

Using record timestamps and having a single NEP job that either processes a record added by your trigger or uses SQL to read the table by timestamp and status and avoids triggers altogether.

Seems easy enough.

Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
Where Information Meets Innovation
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site: http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT