Come on, people! Let's not get into another pissing contest of who programs the right way and who doesn't. As stated, the original question was if there is a way to tell how long a lock has been in place. Nothing else was given so the assumption that the OP was ONLY looking at locks placed programmatically is actually straying off topic. Without further information, specific to why they need the length of time a lock is in place, speculation of percentages or how to generate a timeline does not really seem to take anyone closer to really answering the original question. The only thing, so far, that I've seen that was a semi-direct answer is that maybe UniAdmin can provide the necessary information. Even at that, we don't know if the OP needs to just be able to find this out or if it's needed inside a program.
Now is there a SYSTEM() value or maybe a LIST.READU option that provides this? THAT would be answers of value. <climbing off soap box> -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Porter Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 11:44 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [U2] Record lock I whole-heartedly disagree... 1) I have numerous processes that lock/update/release the same record repeatedly running 24x7 - on the sale process id. 2) I don't want code that works 98% of the time - that's unacceptable. I don't want calls in the middle of the night because it appears processes are locked up when in fact they are running perfectly fine because some program fails 2% of the time. To this end, ALL READU's are wrapped inside of a subroutine that tracks blocking, time held, etc. Exceptions are a part of programming... Not dealing with the exceptions is bad programming practice. Would you not validate input because the user is expected to enter the right result 98% of the time, and the other 2% is ok? Years ago, we changed from a 5 digit numeric specimen id to 5 alpha/numeric... I sat in the pre-live meeting, and brought up the fact that words could be spelled. Words we might not want patients to see... With over 60 million possible permutations, the likelyhood was well under 2%. Would that have been an acceptable error rate to you? It's not to us. We excluded the vowels so words couldn't be spelled... That's programming for the exception. _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list [email protected] http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
