Hi Karsten,

Thanks for the information, but that has me a little confused, when you
say: You should only use this method when unconsistent data can be
tolerated.

This method is being called in the static SalesTable::Find method, I
would expect you wouldn't want inconsistent data here.

What happens when two users call this method
Ie
user A reads record 1.
User B reads record 1.
User A updates field 1,3 and calls update
User B updates field 1,2 and calls update
 
I would suspect field 3 update is lost?



Thanks,
Don

-----Original Message-----
From: kwc_thydev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 4:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [development-axapta] Re: selectForUpdate SelectLocked

Hi,

This method is only active on MS-SQL where it can be used to switch
to uncommitted read mode which will not be blocked by other users
having locks on the desired data. Default is that reads are blocked
by other users having update locks on the desired data.

You should only use this method when unconsistent data can be
tolerated.

On MS-SQL writer blocks reader - meaning that any uncomitted writes 
will block the reader in case of eg. a table scan.

Best regards,

Karsten Wollesen Clausen
Thy Data Center Development A/S

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Don Price"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>    If you at the salesTable method Find, there is a new function
called
> selectLocked, has anybody used this before. I typically use
> selectforupdate. If you look at the context help for the
parameters it
> appears to be different lock types, one exclusive one shared.
Don't know
> why you would put on two different lock types?

> salesTable.selectForUpdate(_forUpdate);
>         salesTable.selectLocked(    (_forUpdate);

> Interesting enough InventTable and Custtable finds do not do the
> selectLocked.

> Can anybody set me straight on this?

> Thanks,
> Don
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here


Yahoo! Groups Links

Reply via email to