Hi The code is just use optimistic ie tableupdate(.t.) The params table is one record so will stick a rlock in for good measure as well.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dave Crozier Sent: 07 February 2007 17:00 To: 'ProFox Email List' Subject: RE: To flush or not to flush, that is the question Ted, I omitted to add that fact. Well expanded and amplified. Dave Crozier -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted Roche Sent: 07 February 2007 16:53 To: profox@leafe.com Subject: Re: To flush or not to flush, that is the question On 2/7/07, Dave Crozier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the Index table how are you locking the parameter (Next record Id) table? > 99% of the time VFP will do this automatically for you but I prefer the > Rlock()/Flock() manual method, that way I can be SURE of getting no > duplicates. This is the ONLY time I ever use manual locking however. I'd amplify your statement a little: You MUST lock a record to ensure that VFP is reading the most current value from a table. In PK generation, this is essential and mandatory. In other places in the application, that's what conflict detection is for. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
