MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive

Home » MIDRANGE-L » December 2013

Re: best practice for web client updates to multiple tables


Commitment control is the "right" answer.

I don't see stored procedures solving this without commitment control.

Why do you think commitment control is a larger effort to implement?


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:59 PM, J Franz <franz400@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Having an interesting discussion with our C# developers over best method
to insert/update new orders to our system. No current journaling on the 11
tables updated for a new order.
We have had instances of "partial updates" in our testing.
The failed updates could be time-outs, user cancelling session (after long
delay), or logic halt in client (they are working on identifying those).
These are customer entered orders, not employee entered, and network
issues can be a factor.
There are couple tables that hold the "working order" until submit.
I have suggested update through stored procedure, so all the final updates
are code running on the i.
Committment control has been mentioned as well, but seen as a much larger
effort to implement.
This would be many hundreds of orders per day.
Jim Franz
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact