At 05:33 AM 18/09/2004 +0000, you wrote:

> >
> > Since (I think!) you are using IBO, why don't you just use
>DMLCaching? If
> > I've understood your requirements, it already implements exactly
>what you
> > want: clients listening for DML commits and optionally ignoring
>their own.
>
>Yes I am using IBO, I do not know of DML Caching so I'll look it up.
>By reading the IBO help manual, and I have trouble understanding it,
>DML Caching can sync changes made in datasets using a common
>transaction.

No, the reverse: different transactions. In the scope of a single
application, it could be used to synchronise datasets; but DMLCaching can
be scoped across application and connection boundaries. There is a TI
sheet at www.ibobjects.com/docs/ti_dmlcaching.ZIP.

>So this won't serve to inform one instance of my program
>if another instance changed something in a table as their
>transactions will not be common.

That's *exactly* what the DMLCaching notification system is designed to do.

./heLen

>Thanks
>
>Russell
>
> >
> > ./heLen
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>