General information
Category:
Coding, syntax & commands
Barbara (and Marc),
I really wonder if RLOCK() and UNLOCK are actually designed to work with buffering of 5? And doesn't RLOCK() / UNLOCK conflict with the design objective of optimistic table buffering?
A possible explanation of what Marc is observing *could* be that operating on the last record is making VFP (erroneously) surmise that a TableUpdate has finished its processing, while operating on the first record (with at least one more buffered) suggests to VFP that a TableUpdate is just starting.
Just some thoughts,
Jim N
>Marc,
>What happens if you use the record number clause? UNLOCK RECORD 1 or UNLOCK RECORD 1054 (you should be able to find the record # you want easily).
>
>HTH
>Barbara
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Here is my situation:
>>
>>vfp 5, support pack 3 installed.
>>set multilock on
>>buffering is set to 5
>>
>>In a private datasession, I lock 2 different records using rlock().
>>
>>I use UNLOCK to unlock (what I hoped to be) 1 record. The problem is that if I unlock the last record, all the records are unlocked, if I unlock the first record, no record is unlock.
>>
>>Can anybody shed any light on this?
>>
>>TIA
>>
>>Marc
Previous
Next
Reply
View the map of this thread
View the map of this thread starting from this message only
View all messages of this thread
View all messages of this thread starting from this message only