That would need to be a scheduled job then. A trigger is fired at the exact moment the event fires if you will. So if 10 people are in his chat room (and presumably there is a record for each one) and all ten of them simply closed their browser windows without logging out properly, he would be stuck with ten records in the table and there would be no triggers being fired at that time.
Now he could use a trigger to check for any other records which may have timed out when another arbitrary record is modified, but in the above scenario, those expired records would be stuck there until the next activity on that table. Also, if this is an active table in the database, a trigger would most likely be fired much more often than necessary creating needless overhead. >Ok if a trigger can only be fired on the insert, delete or modify events. >But since Rick's goal was to remove a record that was 10 seconds old, I >would have thought that could possibly have been handled somehow with >internal resources at least for some DBMS. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:232616 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
