ORA-04091和Compound Trigger(Oracle 11g)
Trigger
常见有两种:行(Row Trigger)和语句(Statement Trigger)
还有：Instead of Trigger和Event trigger。
例子1-Row Trigger：
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER client AFTERINSERT ON tt1 FOR EACH row
BEGIN
dbms_application_info.set_client_info(userenv('client_info')+1 );
END;
例子2-Statement Trigger
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER client_1 AFTERINSERT ON tt1
BEGIN
dbms_application_info.set_client_info(userenv('client_info')-1 );
END;
ORA-04091错误
Tom Kyte有一篇文章很好的解释了ORA-04091。
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/issue-archive/2008/08-sep/o58asktom-101055.html
部分摘抄如下：
Suppose wehave a table that includes country currency combinations with a primarycurrency. The following is sample data:
CountryCurrency Primary_Currency
US USD Y
US USN N
US USS N
We need toenforce the rule that at most one currency can be primary for a given country.We have a BEFORE UPDATE trigger on the above table for each row (usingautonomous transaction to avoid the mutating error) to check whether thecountry has any primary currency.
That was allI needed to read. I knew they had a serious bug on their hands when Iread—paraphrasing:
- At most one currency can be primary (we have a constraint that crosses rows in the table).
- We have a . . . trigger.
- We are using an autonomous transaction to avoid the mutating table error.
The trigger would have looked something like this:
SQL< create or replace
2 trigger currencies_trigger
3 before update on currencies
4 for each row
5 declare
6 PRAGMA AUTONOMOUS_TRANSACTION;
7 l_cnt number;
8 begin
9 select count(*)
10 into l_cnt
11 from currencies
12 where primary_currency='Y'
13 and country = :new.country;
14 if ( l_cnt < 1 )
15 then
16 raise_application_error
17 (-20000, 'only one allowed');
18 end if;
19 end;
20 /Trigger created.
Now, there are many things wrong with this trigger. But the firstobvious clue that something was seriously wrong was their need to use anautonomous transaction. They did that because without it, an update wouldproduce the following result:
SQL< update currencies
2 set primary_currency = 'Y';update currencies
*
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-04091: table OPS$TKYTE.CURRENCIES Is mutating, trigger/functionmay
not see it
ORA-06512: at "OPS$TKYTE.CURRENCIES_TRIGGER”, line 4
ORA-04088: error during execution of
trigger 'OPS$TKYTE.CURRENCIES_TRIGGER'By way of example, suppose the CURRENCIES table, above, was in placewith the sample data provided in the question and the trigger was permitted toread the table while it was changing. Now issue the following command:
update currencies
set primary_currency =
decode(currency, 'USD','N', 'USN', 'Y')
where country = 'US'
and currency in ( 'USD', 'USN');
That should be OK, because it moves the primary currency flag fromUSD to USN. After the statement finishes, there will be only one primarycurrency row. But what if the rows get updated in order of first USN and thenUSD. Well, when the trigger fires the first time, it will see USN withPRIMARY_CURRENCY=‘Y’ and USD with PRIMARY_CURRENCY=‘Y’. The trigger will failthe statement, but the statement is supposed to succeed. On the other hand,what if the data is processed in the order of first USD and then USN? In thatcase, the trigger will fire and find zero PRIMARY_CURRENCY=‘Y’ rows and thenfire again, see only one, and be done.
So, for this trigger, the update will work for some data, sometimes.For other bits of data, the update will not work, sometimes. Two databases withthe same data will fail on different sets of rows and succeed on others. Itwill all depend on how the data happens to be organized on disk and in whatorder it is processed. And that is unacceptable (not to mention veryconfusing).
That, in a nutshell, is why the mutating table constraint exists: toprotect us from ourselves. But unfortunately, the developers asking thisquestion found a way around the mutating table constraint: the autonomoustransaction. That “feature” permits developers to query the table the triggeris firing on yet query it as if it were in another session/transactionaltogether. The trigger will not see its own modifications to the table, andthat is the huge flaw with this thinking: the trigger is attempting to validatethe very modifications it cannot see. The trigger’s sole purpose is to validatethe modifications to the data, but the trigger is reading the data before themodifications take place. It therefore cannot work!
Note that in Oracle Database 11g, there is a newfeature, the compound trigger that can be used to solve this issue.
Compound Trigger
官方文档见：
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/appdev.112/e25519/triggers.htm#LNPLS694
下面给出一个例子
CREATE TABLE log (
emp_id NUMBER(6),
l_name VARCHAR2(25)
);
-- Create trigger that updates log and then reads employees
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER log_deletions
AFTER DELETE ON emp FOR EACHROW
DECLARE
n INTEGER;
BEGIN
INSERT INTO log (emp_id,l_name) VALUES (
:OLD.empno,
:OLD.ename
);
SELECT COUNT(*) INTO n FROMemp;
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('Thereare now ' || n || ' employees.');
END;
DELETE FROM emp WHERE empno = 7935;
SQL Error: ORA-04091: table SCOTT.EMP is mutating, trigger/functionmay not see it
ORA-06512: at "SCOTT.LOG_DELETIONS", line 9
ORA-04088: error during execution of trigger 'SCOTT.LOG_DELETIONS'
04091. 00000 - "table%s.%s is mutating, trigger/function may not see it"
*Cause: A trigger (or auser defined plsql function that is referenced in
this statement)attempted to look at (or modify) a table that was
in the middle ofbeing modified by the statement which fired it.
*Action: Rewrite the trigger(or function) so it does not read that table.
很明显，该Trigger试图读取正在被更改的表，因而触发了ORA-04091。
我们可以用Oacle 11g的新特性compound Trigger重写这个Trigger，从而解决问题。
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER log_deletions
FOR DELETE ON emp
COMPOUND TRIGGER
n int;
AFTER EACH ROW IS
BEGIN
INSERT INTO log (emp_id,l_name) VALUES (
:OLD.empno,
:OLD.ename
);
END AFTER EACH ROW;
AFTER STATEMENT IS
BEGIN
SELECT COUNT(*) INTO n FROMemp;
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('Thereare now ' || n || ' employees.');
END AFTER STATEMENT;
END;
DELETE FROM emp WHERE empno = 7935;1 rows deleted.
请注意：读取emp的select语句被放入AfterStatement段中，表示这条语句将在整个SQL Statement完成后才被执行。这就规避了ORA-04091错误。