> My argument though is that there is a really simple way to get an auditable
> series of numbers that works, is platform independent, and can be easily
> tuned for the level of locking desired. I mean the code for this is 60 lines
> of C++ code including comments, blank lines, and error handling! Its not
> complex! Its certainly not good for all applications (if you open a
> transaction at the beginning of a user data entry session and don't close it
> till the end for example my code would be a really poor idea) but for where
> it does work, it works very well and is not even slightly complex.

In the simple case - a simple generator will do the job
anyway!

If you have already processed the data, and packaged it and
add the 'invoice number' when you 'print' a valid invoice
then I don't thing any of us have a problem. This is in
effect the second stage of a two stage process.

Now the real problem is adding auditable numbers to the
'order entry' rather than the 'invoice'. My customer was
convinced that they had to have a continuose series of
numbers at that stage - but it did not work and was not
necessary.

If you can get away from the 'user data entry' before adding
the number - fine, if not then it is quicker to leave holes,
but changing the number at the commit stage is practical.

I certainly don't want to start getting involved with
locking and waiting - that is why I am using Firebird <g>

--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services