Your understanding is wrong.

What happens if the program is ended via user action, system crash,
power failure, ect... between the write to one table and the update of
the other?

You've got two choices
1) Use commitment control
2) Add lots of extra code into your application for recovery.

In this day and age, why would you write develop and application
without commitment control?

Charles

On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Nathan Andelin<nandelin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My understanding and position now is that in cases where you write a record to one table and update another by a single transaction, you can for all practical purposes, guarantee Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, & Durability, with RPG RLA by first getting a lock on the row you're updating, write the transaction, check for a write error, then conditionally update the locked record if no error occurs on the write.

On the other hand, if you are relegated to only using SQL ...

-Nathan.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 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].