https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=322946
--- Comment #9 from Richard Mortimer <richm+...@oldelvet.org.uk> --- (In reply to swatilodha27 from comment #8) > Another thought, we could implement the internal locking methods. Since > there're already InnoDB tables present, we could use "row level locking". > This would allow multiple write access, making it suitable for multiple > users. > > Thus, "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE" (type of InnoDB lock) could be used. > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/innodb-locking-reads.html > > Please let me know if it could be done? > The problem is not locking within the database that all works fine. The problem is ensuring that digikam will cope with any changes made by other digikam instances. What happens if another digikam adds a tag and then tags some images with that. Or what happens if another digikam deletes an album or a tag. These, plus other things, all have the potential to cause undesirable behaviour in digikam. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
