Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB61047608A for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 15:49:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.115]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 91756475A9E for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2002 15:49:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pppoe2027.gh.centurytel.net (HELO thor.local) (brett?schwarz@64.91.54.35 with plain) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Aug 2002 19:49:09 -0000 Subject: Re: BUG: PGACCESS does not warn when trying to update From: Brett Schwarz To: Jean-Luc Lachance Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org In-Reply-To: <3D5BD2E4.A7F1F769@nsd.ca> References: <20020405083629.6a97dcde.dbr@informactis.com> <24205.1018020022@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3D5AD9BF.F127D21A@nsd.ca> <200208142339.TAA10893@beamish.nsd.ca> <3D5BD2E4.A7F1F769@nsd.ca> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 15 Aug 2002 08:29:56 -0700 Message-Id: <1029425397.1824.510.camel@thor> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200208/51 X-Sequence-Number: 3013 You are correct. Looking at the code a bit, it looks like it does the Right Thing when inserting a new record, but does not do the same for updating a record. Can you file a bug so that this can get tracked properly? http://bugzilla.pgaccess.org thanks, --brett On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 09:12, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote: > But, > > When a record is updated with PgAccess, the least that it should do is > check the return status of the update to find that the record no longer > exists and warn the user!!! > > JLL > > terry wrote: > > > > Actually, M$ Access does the same thing. When a form (or query) > > is populated with the contents of a record, it no longer is > > changed within the database - only within the form (or query). > > It is only when the record is saved that there is any indication > > of change or deletion. The only way to determine if the record > > in the form (or query) has been changed or deleted is to check > > that record in the database during the operation, which is not > > routinely done. > > > > >> DARN!!! > > >> > > >> I have just wasted half a day updating record with PcAccess. > > >> > > >> If one is updating a record that was deleted by someone else, > > >> PgAccess does not warn that the record no longer exists and > > >> silently accept the update. > > >> > > >> Then, if the list is refreshed, the record is gone!!! > > >> > > >> ---------------------------(end of > > >> broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked > > >> our extensive FAQ? > > >> > > >> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html > > > > -- > > > > terry > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly -- Brett Schwarz brett_schwarz AT yahoo.com