So you would recommend the OP modify their entire system of three thousand programs Instead of accept a 98% solution?
Very nice. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Porter <[email protected]> To: u2-users <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, Mar 23, 2012 11:44 am Subject: Re: [U2] Record lock I whole-heartedly disagree... ) I have numerous processes that lock/update/release the same record repeatedly unning 24x7 - on the sale process id. ) I don't want code that works 98% of the time - that's unacceptable. I don't ant calls in the middle of the night because it appears processes are locked up hen in fact they are running perfectly fine because some program fails 2% of he time. o this end, ALL READU's are wrapped inside of a subroutine that tracks locking, time held, etc. xceptions are a part of programming... Not dealing with the exceptions is bad rogramming practice. Would you not validate input because the user is expected o enter the right result 98% of the time, and the other 2% is ok? ears ago, we changed from a 5 digit numeric specimen id to 5 alpha/numeric... I at in the pre-live meeting, and brought up the fact that words could be pelled. Words we might not want patients to see... With over 60 million ossible permutations, the likelyhood was well under 2%. Would that have been an cceptable error rate to you? It's not to us. We excluded the vowels so words ouldn't be spelled... That's programming for the exception. _______________________________________________ 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
