Asynchronous ODBCdirect queries

[dsatino]

Ok, I'm not going to post any code at this point because there's a lot and I'm pretty sure my break point is caused outside of the module it's showing in.

I have a local table that is a line item collection of related data from multiple sources. I'm trying to update this table using up to 7 asynchronous queries. In other words 7 queries simultaneously updating 1 table. None of the queries will ever try to update the same piece of data so I thought I could get away with this. I'm also not reusing any variables for workspaces, connections, or recordsets so that shouldn't be a problem.

I am using the same variable for the local recordset that's being updated though.

Most of the time, I get an error that says:

"A different operation is preventing this operation from being executed"

Am I trying to do too much? Am I missing something conceptually? If anyone has any ideas or can give me a general once over on the ins and outs of asynchronous queries that would be great.

Thx

[TheSmileyCoder]

By simultaneous you mean they run at the same time? Not one after the other? How do you even make them run like that?

[dsatino]

You need to set up multiple odbcDirect workspaces. As long as each is operating in its own space, you can run them asynchronously.

I should clarify though that these are DAO recordsets based on select queries and are not any type of action queries.
For Example:

With odbc1
set rstEX=cnxABC.OpenRecordset("Select Field1, Field2, etc.",dbopendynamic, dbrunasync)
End with

With odbc2
set rstEX2=cnxABC2.OpenRecordset("Select Field1, Field2, etc.",dbopendynamic, dbrunasync)
End with

I'm then running a Do Until .eof Loop on each recordset and comparing it to values in my local recordset. I'm running 7 of these simultaneously, at least. These 7 asynch queries are embedded in another loop that runs twice (with different parameters on the second pass) so it's possible that more are open.

Actually, now that I write this I realize it may be failing because i'm not pausing the operation so that the second loop can't start before the first one ends and I may be killing my first attempt by trying to start the second.

I'll let you know if I can get this to work...

[TheSmileyCoder]

I still have no usefull advice to give :P, however I am curious as to why you need to run them in such a way, and not simply one after another?

[dsatino]

Need? Need,you ask.

Why does Germany need a fresh central forward in a 3-nil game against a 10-man side?

Because 4-nil is simply better.

Or, in my case, because 30 seconds of processing is better than 3 minutes of processing.

:)

All joking aside, I obviously don't really need to do this. I'm simply trying to push the boundaries of my own programming capabilities.