Reade Record Locking

Enhance the reade operation to prevent unwanted record locks on records not associated with your application. Currently when performing a setll on a record that does not exists in the database, it will setll on the next record in sequence. If you don't check if the key is equal to the record you are accessing before performing the Reade and another user is accessing the next record in sequence of a record your program is trying to access that doesn't exists, your application will lock on that next record in sequence even though it has entirely no association with your application.

User calls IT stating his session is in a hanging state. I view his job and notify the user that another user sitting in the next cube over is locking his customer order. I simply tell him to have the person next to him back out. He does this but calls back and tells me that the person was not accessing the same order and there shouldn't have been any conflict. I tell him that this record locking feature is IBMi and has been in place forever and is pretty reliable. So in one way or another, his program is trying to access the same order. But then after digging into it some more by reproducing the lock, I thought hmn? How could this be happening? After discussing this with the consultant who actually programmed the application, we found that you must do a check to determine the record you are setting lower limits is equal to the actual record you want to access. If you don't do this and go ahead and perform the Reade operation, you will experience a record lock. The consultant and I have been programming for years and even though in hind sight, it makes sense, we both have never experience this scenario as long as we could remember. I always thought is was something you check for if you wanted to be more efficient with your coding but not actually provoke a trouble call. So I never coded for this, and there may be many other programmers who haven't either. So what do I do? Fix the hundreds of programs on our system for a scenario that seldom happens and has no potential of corrupting data? Or can there be an enhancement with the Reade operation?