Re: Q: transactions with C-ISAM, again

> > That sounds a little un-logical. You might change it to be: Well, but there are good reasons. > User A is prompted to delete record #1. In the meantime, user B does > whatever he/she wants. User A accepts delete, start transaction, delete > commit. > > I don't think you should ever wait to commit/rollback any transactions. There > was a reason for this, but I don't seem to find my books right now to tell > you why. > It isn't just deleting one record - I have to collect, compare and do a lot just to get integrity. I just wanted to simplify my question - the main reason is, you could delete one record, roll-back and there is no lock held on the deleted record until final commit or roll-back. If I understood the manual, a running transaction would keep (except ISNOLOG) all IS..LOCK records locked for duration to the next commit/roll-back/close. But apparently not for deleted records? Regards, -- Chris Drauch ...................................................................... . c/o DRAUCH Ges.m.b.H. Tel. 43/ 3135/46387-0 . . Gewerbestrasse 5 Fax 43/ 3135/4638728 . . A-8071 Hausmannstaetten EMail cdr@xteam.co.at . ......................................................................