Your second solution only works if one of the processes is controlled by a 
human.
I've encountered deadly embraces between two phantom routines.

Your first solution works, if we have the luxury of skipping locked records.
Some update routines, don't have that luxury as most accountants will let you 
know quite clearly with loud noises and waving of arms.



-----Original Message-----
From: Mecki Foerthmann <[email protected]>
To: u2-users <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue, Oct 25, 2011 10:58 am
Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] LIST.READU EVERY's "waiters" when there are writes w/o 
explicit readu.


Oh yes there is a very easy solution.
f you write a mass update process like in your example you skip the 
ecords with a lock and write them to an error log file.
hat way you never end up in a "deadly embrace".
fter you finished the mass update you can then check for skipped 
ecords and update them later.
Or with the LOCKED clause you can let both parties know who is locking 
hom out and resolve the deadlock amicably by getting the sales person 
o exit the sales rep screen and file the customer record in your 
xample. Ideally you should use a subroutine that tells you who is 
ocking you out instead of READUs anyway.
Mecki
On 25/10/2011 18:27, Wjhonson wrote:
 This is deadly embrace

 
http://knol.google.com/k/will-johnson/deadly-embrace-on-pick-systems/4hmquk6fx4gu/816#view

 The Locked clause does not save us from it.  There is no known trivial 
olution to the problem, which troubles all multi-table, multi-user database 
nvironments.

 Perhaps we should start a new thread to discuss various approaches to the 
ssue.
 _______________________________________________
 U2-Users mailing list
 [email protected]
 http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
______________________________________________
2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
ttp://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

Reply via email to