From: Willibald K. <wi...@dw...> - 2003-07-27 07:38:16
|
""Lee Connell"" <lee...@ad...> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:019101c35375$b62d5890$0c00a8c0@s0phtinc... > > Hi Willibald, Hi Lee, > I am not sure I totally understood what you said but wouldn't you in a = > case like this need to use only 1 connection to the database? You send = > 1 transaction at a time updating those seperate windows. The only way = > "I" see it (like i said i might be missing something) is that you want = > to run multi-threaded app that can send concurrent transactions? Well, if an user goes into 'edit' mode in one of the windows, I could do a dummy update in the transaction that's responsible for that window (to lock the record). If the user now (window 1 is in edit mode) decides to open another window, I can not just commit the changes from window 1 and use the transaction to open window 2. If you've read http://www.interbase-world.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=423 , you'll understnd that I want to use transactions for 'locking' records. Of course it would also be a nice feature to be able to run a report in a separate thread, using the same connection. But I already need more than one transaction per Client without going multi-thread. Willi |