>I have always used optimistic table buffering in my applications but I came across a situation where I might need to change it to pessimistic buffering.
>
>Under Pessimistic Buffering:
>What happens, on the network, when user A is making changes to a record and user B attempts to make changes to the same record. What kind of message does user B gets?

Well, the difference with pessimistic buffering is that the record will be blocked immediately, as soon as user A starts editing. User B will probably get something similar to "cursor is in use by another".

Optimistic buffering only attempts the (implicit) record lock when changes are being saved (TableUpdate()).

>
>Also, if you have pessimistic table buffering, user A can make changes to one record while user B can make changes to another record? Right?

Yes.

I would recommend optimistic buffering in most cases. The fact that two users can edit the same record is usually no problem: a) they usually won't, in practice, b) nothing bad happens if two users really do edit the same record: the last one to try saving will simply have to undo and start over again.

Hilmar.