This is nice to know. I've been known to test for changes to field values
before performing an update op, for the express purpose of avoiding a hit
to the table and the journal.

But I'm concerned about this statement:
But it's undocumented and might change with every PTF.
Does this refer to the OP (to avoid journal entries), or to the "flipflop"
technique you're using to force journal entries?

- Dan

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 12:35 PM, D*B <dieter.bender@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

... I made the same experience, we've made a dummy update under commitment
controll, just to get a record lock for synchronisation purposes, we've got
the lock, but no journal entry. As we wanted to have an entry (just to help
in troubleshooting) we've had to add a flipflop field to get the entries.
But it's undocumented and might change with every PTF.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.