Subject | [IBO] Re:Record was not located to update |
---|---|
Author | dmarmur2002 |
Post date | 2005-09-24T10:29Z |
--- In IBObjects@yahoogroups.com, Lester Caine <lester@l...> wrote:
this case either with cached updates on of off. For me, like for you
Lester, I dont use cached updates. But - the statement looks lik this:
UPDATE TABLE
SET FIELD = :NEW_VALUE
WHERE FIELD = :OLD__VALUE
so even if we change the PK it should work. I surely do a lot of PK
updated with the IBO auto gen statements. Diff from the original
poster is I use native and no cached, though.
I agree that your suggestion is a plausible workaround, though.
/Dany
> Johannes Pretorius wrote:primary keys.
>
> > Good day
> > =-00=--0=
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback.
> >
> > As far as I know we have successfully in other programs edited the
> > We don't have GetText events. But THANKS for the tip as we mighthave spend
> > ours on it in the future if we going to use it.to
>
> Just a thought - since you are changing the very thing that is used
> manage data in the IBO cache!you
> Apply the update via a separate SQL component, and then refresh and
> update the the main view by locating the new values you have put in.
> That way the cache of data will not get upset by the new values and
> know where you are going to ;)I can not see why the IBO auto created Update statement would fail in
this case either with cached updates on of off. For me, like for you
Lester, I dont use cached updates. But - the statement looks lik this:
UPDATE TABLE
SET FIELD = :NEW_VALUE
WHERE FIELD = :OLD__VALUE
so even if we change the PK it should work. I surely do a lot of PK
updated with the IBO auto gen statements. Diff from the original
poster is I use native and no cached, though.
I agree that your suggestion is a plausible workaround, though.
/Dany