If you're using SQL Server then @@identity is your friend anyway.
In terms of the levels of locking supported by access, it doesn't really matter. A 
single transaction block is a single atomic set of instructions. The isolation levels 
determine how one transaction affects another when executed concurrently. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 14 July 2003 14:59
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] SQL INSERT INTO
> 
> 
> :-) 
> 
> I would check what level of DB locking is available to Access 
> via the Jet
> engine and cftransaction - as I said, I havent used Access 
> for years but I
> would assume that its fairly limited much like its feature set.
> 
> If you really wanted to make sure...dump Access together and use an
> enterprise level db which supports SP's!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 14 July 2003 14:58
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] SQL INSERT INTO
> 
> 
> No, bung 'em in cftransaction, that's what it's for!
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 14 July 2003 14:56
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] SQL INSERT INTO
> > 
> > 
> > then bung em into a cflock.....
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steve Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 14 July 2003 14:57
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] SQL INSERT INTO
> > 
> > 
> > Like Adrian says, there is the possiblity for another 
> > transaction to sneak
> > in between your first query and the select max... 
> CFTRANSACTION causes
> > anything inbetween to be treated as an atomic Db transaction 
> > thus ensuring
> > that the select max... is pulling out the record that was 
> created as a
> > result of the insert in the same transaction block. 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX)
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 14 July 2003 14:47
> > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] SQL INSERT INTO
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Erm...I dont think so, well not for Access anyway as I 
> > > (though I cant be
> > > sure, as I havent used Access for donkey's) am not sure 
> > what level of
> > > isolation it supports.
> > > 
> > > It could do,as the Database engine itself should handle 
> > > locking.  If you
> > > want to be safe, I would say bung it in a cflock and be 
> > done with it.
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Aidan Whitehall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: 14 July 2003 14:41
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: RE: [ cf-dev ] SQL INSERT INTO
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > all cftransaction will allow
> > > > you to do  is rollback any changes should you pass in 
> > > crappy code for
> > > the
> > > > insert
> > > 
> > > I thought, in this instance, where the possibility exists 
> > that another
> > > user cause a simultaneous insert to occur, the 
> cftransaction ensured
> > > that the MaxID value returned by the select was the value 
> previously
> > > inserted in the preceding lines of code. Not so?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Aidan Whitehall <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Macromedia ColdFusion Developer
> > > Fairbanks Environmental Ltd  +44 (0)1695 51775
> > > Queen's Awards Winner 2003 <http://www.fairbanks.co.uk/go/awards>
> > > 
> > > ______________________________________________________________
> > > __________
> > > This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
> > > service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on 
> > a proactive
> > > anti-virus service working around the clock, around the 
> > globe, visit:
> > > http://www.star.net.uk
> > > ______________________________________________________________
> > > __________
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > ** Archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
> > 
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > -- 
> > ** Archive: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/
> 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

-- 
** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to