Lester,

I found some explanation in the FAQ
A.
I use "readcommitted", so I will not get an error message if B tries to
change the same record A just changed.

B.
I can use buffersynchoflags to reduce the risk of overriding someone elses
changes, but I will not use pessimistic locking if I can avoid it.

C.
It's perfectly allright if two users change the same record as long as the
update statement changes only changed fields.
This will solve my problem completely. But at the moments it's only possible
using a trick (see my latest thread)

D.
I can make the "not meant to edit by users" fields readonly using
fieldreadonly. This will prevent them to be part of the UPDATE sq.

Thanks for looking for a solution, it helps me alot.

leon