No, it would be invisible, but once the timed auto save aor a manual save
occurred, which would temporarily remove the lock file, you could work on any
computer, allowing other computers in. Also, if a computer or gnucash app
crashed after a save, either auto by timeout or manual, there is no lock file
to block the next session.
There might be a small reload delay if the current session ended on a different
save file, less than at an app startup, since all the code is loaded.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2026 at 08:31:14 PM EDT, Liz <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:33:31 +0000 (UTC)
"David G. Pickett via gnucash-user" <[email protected]> wrote:
> It occurred to me that, once a save has been completed, gnucash could
> delete the lock file. This would allow either another user of
> networked files or a botch run for finance quotes to update the file.
> If the running original gnucash goes to modify his memory or display
> a new page or report, a flag can tell it that it deleted the lock,
> and so check the age of the file and reload if necessary before
> creating a new lock file. This is a lot of functionality and not a
> lot of code to get file sharing.
Because I started with Gnucash long before autosave, my save habits are
frequent.
I complete a set of tasks, eg reconcile some accounts, and then I save.
I'm not stopping using the books, I consider I have reached a point
where redoing my work is an unpleasant thought, and then I save.
The next complication is that my books reside on my nextcloud instance.
I work on one of two computers. While I keep the data synced where
possible, I have chosen not to sync the lock files with the data on
nextcloud.
I find that my use of the lock file would be adversely
affected by such a proposal.
Liz
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
[email protected]
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
