[V4RB] ReadOnly Cursor doesn't need to lock records, does it?

[Dave Parizek]

>on 1/24/04 10:12 PM, Richard Altenburg at valentina at brainchild.nl wrote:
>
>>>  IF you VERY need the first cursor to show ALL records,
>>>  You can use for it NoLocks
>>
>>  So does ReadOnly on a Cursor mean that all records in it are ReadOnly for
>>  others?

Yes, above is correct.  You will need use no locks, or not have 
simultaneous cursors.  It confused me a lot too.



>I thought it would be ReadOnly for my process that created the
>>  Cursor.
>
>No, if one set READ lock, then nobody cannot set WRITE lock on that record.
>
>>  So I will try NoLocks, because I do need a Cursor that has all records in
>  it, and several other cursors that handle other tasks.

Yes, just keep in mind of course that data could be changing and the 
nolock cursors may not realize it.

--Dave
-- 
_______________________________________________
Dave Parizek
Bookseller
Dave at Parizek.com