question understanding lock levels

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

on 1/24/04 7:50 AM, Dave Parizek at dave at Parizek.com wrote:

> If I create a cursor in V4RB 1.98 and do not specify a lock level, it
> will be ReadOnly by default.
> 
> That means other processes can read but not write, correct?

yes
 
> the term, 'readonly', refers to how other processes are affected,
> what others CAN DO.

yes

> But 'readwrite' means other processes cannot read or write, thus
> referring to what others CANNOT DO.  It seems the 2 terms should be
> in the same space as far as CAN DO or CANNOT DO.

I think both can be considered in term as:

    IF you was able set lock READ ONLY on a record,
    then YOU can read it only.
    
    IF you was able set lock READ WRITE on a record,
    then YOU can read and write it.

I do not consider what OTHERS can do.
Important what I can do


> Like it should be
> no_lock, writes_locked, reads_and_writes_locked.  Or it should be
> read_write_ok, read_ok, neither_ok.  But mixing terms from the 2 sets
> makes it confusing.
> 
> Oh well, just semantics.
> 
> Back to my real problem:
> 
> If I set that cursor to nil, the lock should be destroyed, correct?
> 
> I seem to be having problems where the lock still exists even after
> setting mCursor = nil, has anyone else seen this?  I'm getting 363
> errors when I try and do a SQLExecute, and I have no cursors in
> existence at the point when the SQLExecute occurs, or so I think.
> 
> To end the lock, do you need to do something else besides setting the
> cursor to nil?

-- 
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
-------------------------------------------------------------