Hi ranchers,
In a previous post (
https://coderanch.com/forums/posts/list/40/427863#2237145) Roel says that update, unlock and delete shouldnt throw RNFE.
I just wanted to expand on this a little further.
So Roel's reasoning is that the client should have first locked the record to do an update, unlock or delete.
I agree that unlock shouldn't throw RNFE - because a client may have locked, then deleted a record.
However, what about the case where we have a *dumb* client.
What if the client which owns the lock decides to delete a record, then tries to delete the record again or update it after deleting it? Shouldn't these cases throw RNFE?
Cheers,
Jason