Ha. Right, thanks. On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "optimistic-lock=dirty" > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Sidar Ok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Using SQL ? Timestamps can be a consideration. >> >> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Miika Makinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Hi all,I have a requirement to do optimistic concurrency on field level. >>> How would you approach this? Will that mean just very granular entities and >>> tables or? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Miika >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sidar Ok >> http://www.sidarok.com >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
