Information générale
Catégorie:
Base de données, Tables, Vues, Index et syntaxe SQL
PMFJI, here's my $.02 worth.
>>Well, it could still be a very real problem, couldn't it. . . what if someone goes to lunch in edit mode, deliberately expecting to "hold" the record until they return?... or to a rush meeting?... or a mad rush to the john?...or has to look something up in some not-handy reference... or ...?
I use pessimistic row buffering, w/ EDIT and SAVE buttons and a timer. If the user starts to edit something and there is no activity for x minutes, the change is cancelled, the user notified and the record is unlocked. Seems fair to me.
I have always thought that it would be rude to allow a user to start editing a record, THEN after he's entered/updated data, tell him someone else made a change before he could save the data.
I work mostly w/systems w/only a few users.
I've recently read a lot about optimistic buffering being preferable, but have not been convinced...maybe it's just my 'old fashioned' way of looking at things.
I then use transactions when I have changes to make to more than one table.
Great info/discussions here!
Précédent
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement