It isn't mentioned there, but there is a link to this article on The Keys to Record Locking:
http://www.jbase.com/r5/knowledgebase/howto/general/common/RecordLocking.htm ...under the NOTES section of the RELEASE command, which states: "...This is an important point. Avoid using the RELEASE statement without arguments. Not only does this release all locks in all files and all execution locks taken by the current program (which may be undesirable due to the fact that one or more locks must remain set), it also releases all execution locks set in the current program with the LOCK statement. Plus it imposes additional overhead such that the entire lock table has to be searched for all locks belonging to the current process." -Bill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Russell Bowes Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 9:37 AM To: jBASE Subject: Re: RELEASE UNLOCKS in 5.2.15 I agree that using a RELEASE without any arguments is not desirable method of releasing locks, however if I look at the current documentation for RELEASE, I cant see, either implicitly or explicitly, any idication that it will release my LOCK statement. I would prefer either the documentation be updated to highlight this functionality, or the RELEASE mechanism be addressed to leave my LOCK's to my UNLOCK's... Russell. On May 23, 10:05 pm, "comp.lang.smalltalk" <[email protected]> wrote: > This behavior has been around since the jBASE 3 days. > > While it is not explicitly mentioned in the RELEASE or LOCK > documentation, I did cover it in the 'Keys to Record Locking' > knowledgebase article I wrote years ago. > > I would tend to agree that it shouldn't do that but then it is sloppy > programming to issue a RELEASE statement with no arguments. > > Dan > > On May 22, 7:54 pm, Russell Bowes <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > We've recently upgraded a client to 5.2.15 and we noticed that > > issuing a RELEASE (with no arguments) also released a LOCK which the > > application had also taken. > > > This bug may have been in previous releases, but we just hadn't > > noticed it. > > > I'm planning on installing an older release, just out of interest, > > to see if this behaviour existed in previous releases. > > > Has anyone else experienced this issue ? -- IMPORTANT: T24/Globus posts are no longer accepted on this forum. To post, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jBASE?hl=en -- IMPORTANT: T24/Globus posts are no longer accepted on this forum. To post, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jBASE?hl=en
