On Aug 10, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Steve Ellenoff wrote:
> Sorry if the answer is obvious, but how are conflicts handled when
> not using TABLEUPDATE() in VFP, ie, if you are rolling your own
> UPDATE SQL commands and firing them back to the server? I assume the
> problem is minimized if the code that generates your UPDATE is only
> sending changed fields, but what happens if two users do change the
> same field? It would seem that the *only* choice is that the last
> user wins basically..
>
> Is this how people are handling this or am I missing something
> obvious?
I don't "roll my own SQL"; I use SPT to get the data into a Fox
cursor, and then run MakeUpdatable to essentially change that into an
updatable view, at least as far as Fox is concerned. With this
process, TABLEUPDATE() does indeed work as expected.
This behavior is wrapped up in a class, so once it was written, I
can write apps that work against any backend without any more effort
than writing one that uses DBFs.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
