waiting for foobar record nnnnn to be unlocked

[Kenneth Brody]

On 1/29/2015 2:50 PM, Richard Kreiss wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Filepro-list [mailto:filepro-list-
>> bounces+rkreiss=verizon.net at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of Kenneth
>> Brody
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 2:13 PM
>> To: Richard Kreiss; Filepro List
>> Subject: Re: waiting for foobar record nnnnn to be unlocked
>>
>> On 1/29/2015 1:25 PM, Richard Kreiss wrote:
>>> I send a follow-up post and a called routine from transaction is
>>> trying to write back to foobar.
>>>
>>> I need to come up with a way to close the foobar record, run the
>>> transaction routine and bring the user back to the foobar record on
>>> screen 9 as that seems to be the only solution to this problem.
>>>
>>> That looks like it will be "fun" to program.
>> [...]
>>
>> What do you mean by "close the foobar record"?
>
> Since the program is trying to write to the foobar record where the browse
> is active, the record is locked.

Is it necessary to have the "-p" flag on the browse?

> To have the transaction program work properly, it needs to write back to the
> record where the browse is open.  Therefore, the foobar record needs to  be
> in update mode (locked by activating the browse form @key9).  It will have
> to be closed to allow the transaction program to write back to it.

So this isn't the record you're sitting on, but rather the record you've 
selected in the browse?  Again, is it really necessary to have the "-p" on 
the browse?

> The problem is how to exit the browse, run the transaction program and then
> bring the user back to the same record preferably on screen 9 with the
> browse open.

If you don't have "-p" on the browse, you won't have the record locked in 
the first place.

> I may need to create a batch file which is run when the option to run the
> transaction process is selected.  I will have to write the record number to
> a file to be read in on the return and have an input process that moves the
> user to the proper record and opens the browse.  The program, on exit, would
> chain to the regular input process.
>
> I am curious if you have a better way of doing this.  You thoughts would be
> appreciated.
[...]


-- 
Kenneth Brody