Re: Logger for libgda

[David Marín Carreño <davefx bigfoot com>]

On 27 Nov 2000, Rodrigo Moya wrote:

> 
> > As I have already commented in another message, we are worried about
> > security: a client-side logger could be avoided by a modified client
> > program... A server-side logger couldn't be avoided by anyone.
> > 
> I really think logging all DB commands should be optional. A client may need
> 
> speed, and logging all commands may not be affordable if you need speed.
> So, logging should
> be an option, not a requirement.

Of course: logging should be optional. But, for example, in ASPL Fact, all
the modifications should be logged. It must be an option in libgda, but it
cannot depend on the activation from a client-program. This would be a
very big security hole. It must been activated in the server side, and
remain activated until new order.


-- 
David Marín Carreño <davefx bigfoot com>   mmmm
(aka DaveFX)   ICQ UIN: 34866516            ""MM    Mm
http://www.bigfoot.com/~davefx       mmmm     mMM    MM
                                   mM"""MM    MM    mMM
Programador oficial de ASPL Fact         "M   "   mM""
http://aspl-fact.sourceforge.net             mmmm  
                                           mM"""MM         
Advanced Software Production Line SL             "M
Administración de sistemas y creación de Software.