So you're saying, Mark, that there is an implicit lock on any variable that is read into a stored procedure, and that I can dispense with the <cflock>?
As this is for a CMS rather than a public-facing site, I will bow to your judgement, and stop trying to use it! Cheers to all who answered Terry ----------Original Message--------- > I would have guessed that is bad practice as you have a readonly lock > on the session scope while the stored procedure executes > > I'd nab a duplicate of the userid from session scope within the read > lock, then use that new variable when executing the stored procedure > > Mark > > > >In CF5, is it still considered good practice (or was it ever) to put a > >readonly session cflock around a cfstoredproc that reads from a > >session variable, on the basis that no automatic lock checking is set > in > >CFAdmin? > > > >as in: > > > ><cflock scope="session" type="readonly" timeout="10"> > > > ><cfstoredproc procedure="spr_addemployee" datasource="foo" > >returncode="no"> > > <cfprocpraram type="in" cfsqltype="cf_sql_integer" > >dbvarname="@userid" value="#session.userid#"> > > <cfprocresult name="recordinserted" resultset=1> > ></cfstoredproc> > > > ></cflock> > > > >TIA > >Terry Riley -- These lists are syncronised with the CFDeveloper forum at http://forum.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ CFDeveloper Sponsors and contributors:- *Hosting and support provided by CFMXhosting.co.uk* :: *ActivePDF provided by activepdf.com* *Forums provided by fusetalk.com* :: *ProWorkFlow provided by proworkflow.com* *Tutorials provided by helmguru.com* :: *Lists hosted by gradwell.com* To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
