I would imagine the record is read, locked, updated with your change and
released in the blink of an eye. I don't think you would see a sustained
record lock with an SQL client.
Having said that, I wonder if you would want to try an experiment where you
use squirrel to query a file and make it editable. Then in a 5250 session,
or other job, modify a record in the record set. Then in squirrel update
the same record. Will squirrel let you know that the record had been
changed prior to your update. Or will the squirrel client changes just
overwrite the change made by the other session?
Paul Therrien
paultherrien@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.andecosoftware.com
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James H. H. Lampert
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 7:43 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Uniquely identifying a record in SQL without a unique key?
On 1/2/13 5:26 PM, Sam_L wrote:
Might be interesting to do a DSPRCDLCK on the file.
I'm guessing that each time you make a data change a new ODP is being
created, hence the SHRRD locks. (And it might be something to so with
the way SQuirreL is coded.)
So far as I'm aware, Squirrel is a Java application, that uses JDBC.
And I certainly don't need to update more than one record at a time, even if
I'm showing more than one at a time on the screen. So far as I'm aware,
native RLA can't update more than one record at a time, and QuestView, even
when in multi-record update mode, doesn't attempt to do so.
--
JHHL
midrange.com
