Re: Record locking 101

[Booth Martin <booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question:  You are using the (n) extender on the get of the record that  
fills the screen, right?

Pete Helgren wrote:
> I had a program that was originally written in such a way that it would 
> read/chain and lock a record while the user was in the maintenance 
> screen.  That would cause problems for a posting program that could also 
> be run  while records were being maintained. So I needed to eliminate 
> the lock in the maintenance program.  Thanks to this list, I modified 
> the program so that the record data is now retrieved into a data 
> structure temporarily (with supposedly no lock on the record) and then 
> when the user presses enter the record is retrieved again from the DB, 
> the data updated and written without delay so that the lock is very 
> transitory.
>
> Now comes time to test it.  When this was originally reported as a 
> problem, I looked at the code and found the flawed design and set about 
> fixing it.  I never looked at the job to see what the locks on the 
> record actually looked like.  So now I am viewing the record locks on 
> the file and I am not sure what I *should* see.  This is what I do see 
> when I am in the record in the "view" mode (shouldn't be a lock on the 
> record)
>
>  Record                                            Lock 
>  Number  Job         User        Number  Status    Type 
>     494  QPADEV000R  PETE        861530  HELD      UPDATE
>
> So I am guessing that I still have some more work to do, yes? 
>
> An UPDAT or DELET after a CHAIN would effectively release the lock on 
> the record, correct?
>  
> What should the Lock Type be when you are just reading through the 
> records with no need to update?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pete
>
>
>