HP3000-L Archives

May 1996, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Thomas Harmon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Thomas Harmon <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 1 May 1996 09:44:23 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
[log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> Item Subject: Image Locking
> >Is there any way to get around Images requirement of have the whole dataset
> >lock
> >ed when
> >doing a DBPUT or DBDELETE?
>
> For detail sets at least, you can use item level locking (the MODE 6 stuff
> you describe) for puts and deletes as well as updates I believe.  You can
> place an item lock on an entry that does not yet exist before doing a put.
>
> For master sets, I think you are required to have the whole set locked for
> puts and deletes, because other unrelated records may be moved as a side effect
> of adding or deleting records.
>
> GavinI should have mentioned in my original post that I was talking about master datasets. It
seems that there IS no way to add or delete to a master dataset without using a mode 3
or 4 lock which means that no mode 5 or 6 locks can be in effect.
--
Thomas A Harmon                  (715) 833-5513
Systems Analyst                  mailto:[log in to unmask]
Eau Claire Area School District
500 Main Street
Eau Claire, WI  54701

ATOM RSS1 RSS2