>Hilmar,
>
>>>
>>>Take a look at the article 'Limiting Simultaneous Users' by Craig Berntson
http://www.craigberntson.com/Articles/kb003.htm>>
>>Thanks for the link. However, I wanted to ask what you think about the following: wouldn't it be simpler to place locks on 5 (or 10 - depending on the number of licenses) consecutive records in a table, instead of creating files with LLFF and seeing whether they can be opened? Or would record locking be less safe, for some reason?
>
>That is the way I do it for about seven years now. Though occasionally there seems to get a record lock lost, i've been pretty comfortable with it. I've never had any serious report indicating that this does not work.
>
>Walter,
Walter, thanks for your reply.
Now, Sergey thinks that if the application hangs, the record lock might stay in effect for a long time. What is your opinion / experience on this?
Hilmar.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
