From: "Marcos Vinicius Dufloth" <dufloth@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 12:16 PM

>
> I think this is impossible. B get deadlock just because A locked the

record

> and B couldn't update it.
>

So, unless A starts an update and doesn't commit or rollback, B shouldn't
get a deadlock? Then, B should get an update error, correct or no?

Woody