Re: Locking records on Cobol

You're right!, it was in a subroutine that we used for record selection,
thanks!!

Thanks everybody, what a headache!! Thanks a lot! 

-----Original Message-----
From: cobol400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cobol400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
MichaelQuigley@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 6:24 AM
To: cobol400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [COBOL400-L] Locking records on Cobol

I'll tell you what I often see, I don't know if it's your case or not. 
There's a subfile which displays all the records for the user to select 
one to update.  If the same access path is used to populate the subfile as 
is used to update the records, each record will be locked as they are read 
to produce the subfile.  If you read the records to populate the subfile 
with 'no lock'.

Then after the user selects a record for update, re-read it without the 
'no lock' phrase.  This will lock the record for that user to update it.

btw-- 'LOCK IS MANUAL' is not available on OS/400 V5R2 or V5R3 -- I did 
not find any reference to the phrase in the V5R4 manual either.

cobol400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 05/22/2006 01:52:21 PM:

> 
> date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:04:28 -0500
> from: "Garcia, Luis" <lgarcia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> subject: Re: [COBOL400-L] Locking records on Cobol
> 
> Would it be wise to use the "NO LOCK" if I'm changing the record?
>