Trying to understand record locks

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

on 10/17/03 22:45, James Kleinschmidt at jkleins at shentel.net wrote:

> No, I have two different cursors theCur and theNewCur. "theCur"  is
> stored in a global variable and then I make a new cursor "theNewCur".
> The only difference in the two scenerios is that with the first I just
> stored the locked cursor directly and then made theNewCur and with the
> second I stored an unlocked cursor and then immediately replaced it
> with a locked cursor. The results, its seems to my thinking, should be
> the same, since the locked cursor is the currently stored cursor in
> both cases.

> The second cursor "theNewCur" should fail both times as it is trying to
> access locked data. It does fail the first time. But in the second
> instance the cursor does not fail. It allows me to put a cursor into
> theNewCur and update records in it even though I have a valid cursor
> with read/write locks in a different global variable. I hope that was
> clearer.

Not very.

Can you show piece of code.

Why in second scenario second cursor must fail ?
If first record DO NOT locks records as you say.


-- 
Best regards,
Ruslan Zasukhin      [ I feel the need...the need for speed ]
-------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail: ruslan at paradigmasoft.com
web: http://www.paradigmasoft.com

To subscribe to the Valentina mail list go to:
http://lists.macserve.net/mailman/listinfo/valentina
-------------------------------------------------------------