An example of when you might want to do pessimistic record buffering is if, say, two salespeople are talking to customers about the same stock item. If the first one to the stock is "doing a deal" < s > with a customer, the second should be told (IMO) that it's not necessarily available...It hasn't actually been sold out of inventory yet, but he can't really sell it.

But if two users are looking a patient's record, say, and one is updating the pulse/etc stats of an office visit and the other is updating the patient's phone number...you don't necessarily want to block one user from getting their work done since the other is doing something totally different.


>Hi Arnon,
>
>But the decision would be made at the end of data entry, am I right on at least that much?
>
>I can see where the field level stuff would be useful. Thanks.
>
>>Optimistic buffering doesn't have to be mean that the last one wins
>>if/when you see a conflict you can do all sorts of stuff including letting the user decide or letting the first one win etc.
>>also note that you can set it so that the last one wins happens on the field level - i.e. if 2 users update different fields both their changes register
>>
>>Arnon