Re: unique ascending numbers
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2003
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 50204
interpreted = N
texte = However, since this solution is *only* available on v5, it is not an option to those of us who continue to use v4.x whether by our own choice, or because we simply have no other choice. >However, in this case, using the autonumber feature is much better then >using external code to generate the 'next highest' number. This is because >the code to generate the new value is embedded within the Append and Replace >(with append=T) engine code where the database has already been locked >exclusively for modification. If you use external WebDNA to do a >preliminary search, you must also 'wrap' that code with an exclusive lock to >ensure that two threads do not enter your number generating code at the same >time. So, in addition to the extra overhead of the search, you also have >the overhead of the exclusive lock context. The 'autonumber' feature is a >safer more efficient approach. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: WebDNA Talk [mailto:WebDNA-Talk@talk.smithmicro.com]On Behalf Of >> Kenneth Grome >> Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 10:14 PM >> To: WebDNA Talk >> Subject: Re: unique ascending numbers >> >> >> >At 7:26 PM 5/9/03, Nitai @ ComputerOil wrote: >> >>On 9.5.2003 19:06 Uhr, Marc Kaiwi
wrote: >> >> >> >>> Humm, I was hoping to avoid throwing in an extra search just to >> >>> retrieve the last SKU number in the db. (I have a thing >> about extra >> >>> processing simply because it's easy) >> >> >> >>Do you have 5.x? If so then use &autonumber=field and you >> are done, no extra >> >>processing! >> > >> >You don't know that. You can say that it's easier to code for use >> >mere mortals, but do we know that the processing behind >> >&autonumber=field is less CPU intensive then a search to find the >> >maximum value in a field and then adding one to it? >> >> >> Your question is also relevant to the engine's shopping cart code vs. >> external code that does the same thing. I learned a very long time >> ago that when I use my own external shopping cart code, it runs a lot >> faster than webdna's internal code. >> -- >> >> Sincerely, >> Kenneth Grome >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> My programmers will write WebDNA code for you at $27 an hour! >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >> the mailing list . >> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to >> >> Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ > > >------------------------------------------------------------- >This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . >To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to > >Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ -- Sincerely, Kenneth Grome ------------------------------------------------------------- My programmers will write WebDNA code for you at $27 an hour! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
However, since this solution is *only* available on v5, it is not an option to those of us who continue to use v4.x whether by our own choice, or because we simply have no other choice. >However, in this case, using the autonumber feature is much better then >using external code to generate the 'next highest' number. This is because >the code to generate the new value is embedded within the Append and Replace >(with append=T) engine code where the database has already been locked >exclusively for modification. If you use external WebDNA to do a >preliminary search, you must also 'wrap' that code with an exclusive lock to >ensure that two threads do not enter your number generating code at the same >time. So, in addition to the extra overhead of the search, you also have >the overhead of the exclusive lock context. The 'autonumber' feature is a >safer more efficient approach. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: WebDNA Talk [mailto:WebDNA-Talk@talk.smithmicro.com]On Behalf Of >> Kenneth Grome >> Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 10:14 PM >> To: WebDNA Talk >> Subject: Re: unique ascending numbers >> >> >> >At 7:26 PM 5/9/03, Nitai @ ComputerOil wrote: >> >>On 9.5.2003 19:06 Uhr, Marc Kaiwi wrote: >> >> >> >>> Humm, I was hoping to avoid throwing in an extra search just to >> >>> retrieve the last SKU number in the db. (I have a thing >> about extra >> >>> processing simply because it's easy) >> >> >> >>Do you have 5.x? If so then use &autonumber=field and you >> are done, no extra >> >>processing! >> > >> >You don't know that. You can say that it's easier to code for use >> >mere mortals, but do we know that the processing behind >> >&autonumber=field is less CPU intensive then a search to find the >> >maximum value in a field and then adding one to it? >> >> >> Your question is also relevant to the engine's shopping cart code vs. >> external code that does the same thing. I learned a very long time >> ago that when I use my own external shopping cart code, it runs a lot >> faster than webdna's internal code. >> -- >> >> Sincerely, >> Kenneth Grome >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> My programmers will write WebDNA code for you at $27 an hour! >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to >> the mailing list . >> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to >> >> Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ > > >------------------------------------------------------------- >This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . >To unsubscribe, E-mail to: >To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to > >Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ -- Sincerely, Kenneth Grome ------------------------------------------------------------- My programmers will write WebDNA code for you at $27 an hour! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Kenneth Grome
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:
WC TableGrinder (1997)
Quit revisited (1997)
Not really WebCat (1997)
WebDelivery: One step closer !! (1997)
Cancel Subscription (1996)
[WebDNA] [WSC] WebDNA Development Summit (2014)
ANother SHOWIF problem (1997)
[WebDNA] OT: to all coders (mothers too ;-) who so know this phenom.. (2009)
WC Host List (2000)
Limitations on fields? Server is crashing (1997)
WC2b15 - [HTMLx]...[/HTMLx] problems SOLVED! (1997)
Authenticate (1997)
WebCatalog Plug-in for Webstar. (1997)
Protect Tage and Groups (1998)
Simple way to create unique SKU (1997)
Add to a field (1998)
WebMerchant? (1998)
What is the default seed for the encrypt context? (2000)
[WebDNA] sendmail time stamp (2013)
Why is my easy [AddLineItems] NOT working?? (2000)