[AccessD] Desperately Seeking!

<rant>
I don't feel like rekindling any bound/unbound wars, so instead I'll try
another tack. The problem is disconnected recordsets, which are very cool if
the liklihood of simultaneous updates of a row is remote. In fact, it's not
so much a database problem as a business practices problem, IMO. What the
hell are two people updating the same row for? There's a problem here and it
doesn't concern the database; it concerns the workflow, which by definition
is outside the specifications. OTOH, excellent arguments from the db folk
occasionally persuade management that the problem is indeed outside the db,
and should be addressed by someone other than you.
</rant>

<reality>
Given that you must prevent simultaneous updates of a set of rows, and given
that you have taken the unbound path, without a massive rewrite I think your
quickest option is to revisit all the recordset declarations, setting
Pessimism TRUE in your rs.open() arguments. This effectively offloads the
problem to the db, which is good, since it won't allow your users to
overwrite each other even if your app in theory does. (That's why I always
put all the smarts into sprocs and rules and such, rather than coding them
in Access. Then, even if your app is buggy, it doesn't matter:-) Lock it all
down with pessimistic recordsets and go from there. You can probably visit
every occurenece with a project-wide search, and paste the revised string
in.
</reality>

<fantasy>
I'm having difficulty coming up with an example where multiple users would
want to update the same rows. A wife and husband are both phoning to
complain about a VISA charge? Three employees are calling from Client X to
revise the purchase quantities in the details of OrderID 2345?

Multiple people updating identical rows = a workflow problem, IMO. In a
well-designed workflow, this should never occur.

Making this point at your next meeting, you are given a 100% salary boost,
several opportunities for sex with strangers, and the pleasure of watching
the entire organization reconfigure itself to your insights. Suddenly they
appreciate how brilliant you are and shape their enterprise around you.
Billions at stake, all on your mind.
</fantasy>

Arthur

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Tewksbury
Sent: May 2, 2003 10:16 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [AccessD] Desperately Seeking!


Can Anyone Help Me?

I have built a client server application using .adp front end and SQL Server
back end.  Within the application itself I use unbound forms and retrieve
records using ADO recordsets at run time.  The way I have initially deployed
the application is to copy an instance of the .adp to each desktop and run
it locally.  The problem has been that people keep overwriting each other's
updates - and changes are not reflected fast enough.

I have a couple of different thoughts on how to tackle this - either ratchet
down the ODBC refresh rate, or run a single, centralized copy of the .adp
(which throws up some non-updateable warning every time it starts which I
don't know how to suppress).  Of course, I acknowledge that I am a total
newbie, and both of these options may be flawed.

Thanks a bunch,

- Sherri





_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

_______________________________________________
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com