> -Messaggio originale-
> Da: Przemyslaw Czerpak [mailto:dru...@acn.waw.pl]
> Inviato: martedì 26 gennaio 2010 20.05
> A: Harbour Project Main Developer List.
> Oggetto: Re: R: [Harbour] CDX RDD question (live usage/compatibility)
>
> 1 works like CL52/CL53 DBFN
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, Maurizio la Cecilia wrote:
> Ok. My mistake. I based my choice on xHarbour manual saying:
> "Setting the locking scheme to 1 will lock the database files like
> CA-Clipper 5.2 does. To use CA-Clipper 5.3's locking scheme, set
> DBFLOCKSCHEME to 2. This will emulate shared locks
> CL52 DBFCDX/SIX3 SIXCDX drivers are broken and can corrupt
> index files.
> so I cannot give you any guaranties that it will work. Anyhow if
> you want to use it and access the same index files by Harbour then
> you should use in Harbour SIXCDX RDD which tries to replicate some
> low level SIXC
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Maurizio la Cecilia wrote:
Hi,
> Sorry for reopening a very old and OT thread, but my needs are quite the same
> as Viktor's one and i think something changed after 2005.
> I ported successfully a large clipper 5.2e application, working on many
> networks, to Harbour 2.0.
> N
I forgotten to say that the same piece of code works fine in Clipper
5.2e+DBFNTX and in Harbour+DBFCDX.
Maybe the opportunistic lock take a rule in that?
TIA.
Maurizio
Maurizio la Cecilia wrote:
>
> Sorry for reopening a very old and OT thread, but my needs are quite the
> same as Viktor's one
Sorry for reopening a very old and OT thread, but my needs are quite the same
as Viktor's one and i think something changed after 2005.
I ported successfully a large clipper 5.2e application, working on many
networks, to Harbour 2.0.
Now, before to swap the installation to Harbour version, i woul
