Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue &
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2010
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 105448
interpreted = N
texte = If you use [replace append=3Dt] and look for the email=20address, it shouldn't hurt anything. They can only enter=20once a month anyway, and you are already checking that=20they haven't entered that month. This way you wouldn't=20even have to do that check. I assume you run the drawing=20based on the entry date, so this wouldn't hurt that=20either. In fact it would keep your db smaller.TerryOn Fri, 02 Jul 2010 09:46:45 -0400 Steve Raslevich
=20wrote:> Hi Govinda,>=20> Thanks for your reply. I do use the [replace with option=20>to append if not found] in some situations such as when=20>adding products so model numbers remain unique. However,=20>there are many instances where I need auto numeric=20>serialization. I have been following this list and=20>reading the archives for a while. I find WebDNA easy to=20>learn and want to stick with it. However, I am finding=20>post after post talking abount workarounds. I am=20>beginning to get concerned wondering when I should trust=20>a provided function such as [autonumber] and when I need=20>to look for a workaround. If [autonumber] is unreliable,=20>then why is it provided at all? Having to guess what=20>really works and when I need to look for a workaround=20>makes learning and moving forward difficult for me. I use=20> [autonumber] in just about every database. If=20>[autonumber] is unreliable, then I have a ton of things=20>to go back and change.>=20> Thanks again for your reply.>=20> Best Regards,> Steve>=20>=20>=20> Govinda wrote:>>> #1) In this short time, the [autonumber] function=20>>>created at least=20>>> (2) identical, yet uniquely autonumbered records for (2)=20>>>different=20>>> customer submits. Both duplicate entries show a unique=20>>>autonumber 1=20>>> apart from each other and show a time stamp of exactly=20>>>the same time=20>>> down to the second. The user clicking the submit button=20>>>more than=20>>> once should not be the issue here. I have the contest=20>>>limited to one=20>>> entrant per email address per month. When the form is=20>>>submitted, it=20>>> first searches the contest.db file for an existing=20>>>record generated=20>>> this month that contains the same email address being=20>>>submitted.=20>>> WebDNA should have found the first record and not=20>>>written the second=20>>> record due to the email address match but it did so=20>>>twice. The time=20>>> between the two occurrences is roughly 3 hours.>>>> Hi Steve>>>> I dunno,>> ...but regarding your first paragraph... pehaps you=20>>could try a=20>> workaround for [autnumber] by using code like what is=20>>found at the=20>> bottom (User Contributed Notes - See Gary's), from here:>>>> http://docs.webdna.us/pages.html?context=3DReplaceContext.html>>>> ...just a thought. I never use [autonumber] so I can't=20>>say.>> In the past we have always used [cart] (or even=20>>sometimes=20>> [cart]_[index] , when inside a loop) to generate a=20>>unique ID for a=20>> field val.>> I have seen code like Gary's example working fine.. but=20>>not under a=20>> heavy-simultaneous-use environment. But it may be safer=20>>than=20>> [autonumber] (?).. by the sound of things that you are=20>>finding.>>>> --=20>> Govinda>> govinda.webdnatalk@gmail.com>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------->=20=A0
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
|
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Tom Duke 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Steve Raslevich 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Steve Raslevich 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & ("Terry Wilson" 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Govinda 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Steve Raslevich 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Steve Raslevich 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Dale Therio 2010)
- Re: [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Govinda 2010)
- [WebDNA] autonumber duplication, time stamp issue & locking up (Steve Raslevich 2010)
|
If you use [replace append=3Dt] and look for the email=20address, it shouldn't hurt anything. They can only enter=20once a month anyway, and you are already checking that=20they haven't entered that month. This way you wouldn't=20even have to do that check. I assume you run the drawing=20based on the entry date, so this wouldn't hurt that=20either. In fact it would keep your db smaller.TerryOn Fri, 02 Jul 2010 09:46:45 -0400 Steve Raslevich =20wrote:> Hi Govinda,>=20> Thanks for your reply. I do use the [replace with option=20>to append if not found] in some situations such as when=20>adding products so model numbers remain unique. However,=20>there are many instances where I need auto numeric=20>serialization. I have been following this list and=20>reading the archives for a while. I find WebDNA easy to=20>learn and want to stick with it. However, I am finding=20>post after post talking abount workarounds. I am=20>beginning to get concerned wondering when I should trust=20>a provided function such as [autonumber] and when I need=20>to look for a workaround. If [autonumber] is unreliable,=20>then why is it provided at all? Having to guess what=20>really works and when I need to look for a workaround=20>makes learning and moving forward difficult for me. I use=20> [autonumber] in just about every database. If=20>[autonumber] is unreliable, then I have a ton of things=20>to go back and change.>=20> Thanks again for your reply.>=20> Best Regards,> Steve>=20>=20>=20> Govinda wrote:>>> #1) In this short time, the [autonumber] function=20>>>created at least=20>>> (2) identical, yet uniquely autonumbered records for (2)=20>>>different=20>>> customer submits. Both duplicate entries show a unique=20>>>autonumber 1=20>>> apart from each other and show a time stamp of exactly=20>>>the same time=20>>> down to the second. The user clicking the submit button=20>>>more than=20>>> once should not be the issue here. I have the contest=20>>>limited to one=20>>> entrant per email address per month. When the form is=20>>>submitted, it=20>>> first searches the contest.db file for an existing=20>>>record generated=20>>> this month that contains the same email address being=20>>>submitted.=20>>> WebDNA should have found the first record and not=20>>>written the second=20>>> record due to the email address match but it did so=20>>>twice. The time=20>>> between the two occurrences is roughly 3 hours.>>>> Hi Steve>>>> I dunno,>> ...but regarding your first paragraph... pehaps you=20>>could try a=20>> workaround for [autnumber] by using code like what is=20>>found at the=20>> bottom (User Contributed Notes - See Gary's), from here:>>>> http://docs.webdna.us/pages.html?context=3DReplaceContext.html>>>> ...just a thought. I never use [autonumber] so I can't=20>>say.>> In the past we have always used [cart] (or even=20>>sometimes=20>> [cart]_[index] , when inside a loop) to generate a=20>>unique ID for a=20>> field val.>> I have seen code like Gary's example working fine.. but=20>>not under a=20>> heavy-simultaneous-use environment. But it may be safer=20>>than=20>> [autonumber] (?).. by the sound of things that you are=20>>finding.>>>> --=20>> Govinda>> govinda.webdnatalk@gmail.com>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------->=20=A0
"Terry Wilson"
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Webcatalog acgi conflict? (1999)
[FEATURE REQUEST] (2004)
Multiple prices (1997)
WebDelivery downloads alias, not original ? (1997)
Opinion: [input] should be called [output] ... (1997)
WebCat2b12--[searchstring] bug (1997)
FYI: virus alert (1996)
Sorting Dates in a search (2000)
WebDNA 5.0 Questions (2003)
Protect and Serve (1999)
Suffix Mapping (1998)
emailer error 103 part ii (1997)
Exclamation point (1997)
Enterprise Server (1998)
Entering the Serial Number (2003)
WebCat2b15MacPlugin - [protect] (1997)
Dynamic Pop up menu? (1997)
OK, here goes... (1997)
Need help with emailer- 2 issues (1997)
Can this be done? (1997)