ca.portal.admin

Re:Re: [IDMSVENDOR-L] Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?

Discussion created by ca.portal.admin on Mar 9, 2010
then perhaps the real question becomes:=20 =20 does Ms Kline need this
information real time as it happens, or can=20 daily reports suffice=20 =20
if the latter, then certainly the log can be interrogated and all=20
necessary information can be retrieved=20 if the former - good luck - even
if you sat all day executing lockmon=20 you MIGHT see stalls building, but
many deadlocks could come and go=20 between two hits of the ENTER key=20 =20
chris=20



The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive
this material/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or
destroy the material/information.
"
IDMS Public Discussion Forum
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
SMTP








Normal

Normal
Re: Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?
" Don - question, accepting completely the NOTIFY locks used by ADS across p=
seudo-converse. Here's a scenario.=20

1) The dialog does OBTAIN on record types A, B and C, and a MODIFY of C in =
the premap. At the pseudo-converse the update of C must be COMMITTED when t=
he FINISH of the run unit occurs - but ADS maintains NOTIFY locks on the 3 =
record types.=20

2) Now - in the response process the dialog does an OBTAIN and MODIFY of re=
cord type D - when ADS BINDs the Run Unit would it not re-acquire the NOTIF=
Y locks as database run unit locks PRIOR to doing the OBTAIN and MODIFY of =
record type D?=20

3) So it would be possible for the A, B or C record types to interact with =
other active tasks - thus causing confusion for the developer who only sees=
record type D referenced in the response process code?

Just curious - as this is the sort of scenario that I believe the CAS user =
is seeing.

Cheers - Gary=20

Outcomes