🚀 go-pugleaf

Cecil,

>>Bowen says 'No'.  Oh goodie, I love a debate over things I know nothing
about.  <<

Romain and Bowen are not really contradicting each other they're discussing
different things. One of the key advantages of a split client/server
architecture is that both halves are independently executing programmes
capable of running their own code. In the case of an InterBase server that
code is written in SQL and it can either be transmitted to the server by the
client (Bowen's scenario) or permanently embedded at the server end
(Romain's scenario).

If the client is transmitting SQL embedded in VdB code then it may well have
to comply with Local SQL rules, however if the client is simply telling the
server to run routine MyProcedure (a stored procedure) or implicitly
triggering a routine by performing an action (the act of editing a record
can be used to fire AFTER UPDATE triggers etc.) then the VdB client (or more
accurately, the BDE) never sees the SQL that the server executes and
therefore has no need to understand/support it. Similarly, if the VdB client
uses a 'passthrough' call (which is what I assume SQLExec does) the BDE will
simply pass the command to the server without attempting to
interpret/validate it.

Eryk