|
There are even variations on this one, Ron. If you have complete control over your database, you can implement a much faster mechanism by putting a timestamp or even simple counter in your database that is changed whenever a record is updated. In the case of a counter, simply save the counter when the record is read. Reread the counter on update and if it has changed, then go through the whole "record has changed" logic. Otherwise, increment the counter and update the record. Note that this has the possibility of wiping out changes done "externally" (as in via DFU or ODBC). Personally, though, I find the idea of allowing such outside updates to the database to be a recipe for disaster much larger than a simple record lock. A record lock stops a user; losing database integrity stops ALL your users. Joe > From: RPower@xxxxxxxxxx > > I think I'll do the whole, get record, display record, user does what they > want, then check before update that it's the same. Thanks all.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.