Re: No Lock With Update?

[Jeff Young <jyoung0950@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jerry,
If you use the (N) extender, the record is *not* locked, and thus you can
not issue an UPDATE or DELETE against it unless you read it again for
update.



On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jerry C. Adams <midrange@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This may be a silly question, but I cannot find the answer (or a hint) in
> the manual.
>
>
>
> If one uses READ(n) or CHAIN(n) against a table that has been defined for
> update, can one still use the UPDATE or DELETE op-codes against the
> retrieved record.  All that the manual says is that the record is retrieved
> without locking it.  It would seem to me that, since the program has the
> record, it could still be updated or deleted.
>
>
>
> Normally I wouldn't try something like this, but I am working on a process
> where it is a viable option so I was curious.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Jerry C. Adams
>
> IBM i Programmer/Analyst
>
> There was never a great genius without a tincture of madness. -Aristotle
>
> --
>
> A&K Wholesale
>
> Murfreesboro, TN
>
> 615-867-5070
>
>
>
> --
> This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (RPG400-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.