On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:12 AM, justin@xxxxxxxxxxxx <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The bigger problem is using time stamps to find the record for updating > > Timestamps will not be unique as more than 1 record can have the same value > > I suggest changing the updating method to use a unique key. MS-Access achieves optimistic locking by listing all of the columns in a table in the WHERE clause of the UPDATE statement. If ms-access unable to fully represent the data stored in a postgresql table, Access will throw back update conflict errors when postgres doesn't update the record due to the truncated data values. I've also seen this with null valued boolean fields. Part of the solution would be configure the ODBC driver to use PostgreSQL's xmin for optimistic locking. Of-course this doesn't fix MS-Accesses inability to handle the ranges of many of PG data-types. -- Regards, Richard Broersma Jr. Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG) http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
