Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of ersin.er@gmail.com designates
 64.233.184.238 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=QUsUYUNQKjNthKTNq1QsHzuvKoQn3uFqMDfosgXKgIkLvj9pjo0WbVPzXYEw1Nvdykq6dhZGzkOJTvRUKmkVxAunq8BD2y7279BEQbYfrV8mYCfJW1H57PTbyfQOtTTUrOclni5svDmpxcP67jE3hzBut1oBDdyp0wFKWYWWoE8=
Message-ID: <a1b4a6610703171428g1ef31118ue9800b80ff0f319c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:28:39 +0200
From: "Ersin Er" <ersin.er@gmail.com>
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>,
	erodriguez@apache.org
Subject: Re: [core] Loading stored-procedures and setting triggers
In-Reply-To: <a1b4a6610703171405y45170717kd4905d009555e66b@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <568753d90703161203q5df0a56dpe9a7073db03cf76c@mail.gmail.com>
	 <a1b4a6610703161259y4b622ea3ua1f23e7f85f4a785@mail.gmail.com>
	 <568753d90703161308x7b62c720lb66d71a352f8fda7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <a1b4a6610703161351x611e0dfbr724bb08e5a0151e3@mail.gmail.com>
	 <a1b4a6610703170936y6a16c162v945aa1cacb43478b@mail.gmail.com>
	 <568753d90703171326u674de2d8y151d80f6704be321@mail.gmail.com>
	 <a1b4a6610703171405y45170717kd4905d009555e66b@mail.gmail.com>

On 3/17/07, Ersin Er <ersin.er@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/17/07, Enrique Rodriguez <enriquer9@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/17/07, Ersin Er <ersin.er@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 3/16/07, Ersin Er <ersin.er@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > Currently no. It's on TODO. My proposals were executing Triggers with
> > > > creation time order and the other one was a Precedence specifier in
> > > > the grammar. We'll figure it out soon.
> > >
> > > OK, now done. I have made some changes to the TriggerSpecification
> > > grammar and TriggerService code. Now, we have guarantied ordered
> > > execution of multiple SPs per Trigger execution.
> >
> > I thought about this some more.  When a userPassword comes in, I
> > derive keys, store the keys, and then discard the userPassword.  The
> > userPassword should never touch the database.  My understanding with
> > an AFTER trigger is that the userPassword would actually get stored.
> > My intention with the ordering of the triggers was to then delete the
> > userPassword with a 2nd trigger, but I realized it would be better to
> > not store the userPassword in the first place.  How can I avoid
> > storing the userPassword and only store the keys?
>
> Well, as designed and once implemented we support BEFORE Triggers. But
> I removed those portions of the code due to some inconsistencies. I
> can reimplement BEFORE Triggers quickly (hopefully). Let me give it a
> try in a few days. So, BEFORE Triggers will do the job for you, right?

Hmm, what you need is infact INSTEAD of triggers which cause lots of
inconsistencies to be resolved. Let me give them a try too.

> > Enrique
> >
>
>
> --
> Ersin
>


-- 
Ersin