Hello everyone,
I am currently working on an ABBYY Vantage integration for my client, and we encountered a concern regarding concurrent access to transactions. Specifically, the client wants to ensure that when one operator is manually verifying a transaction, it is locked to prevent another operator from working on the same transaction at the same time.
During testing, I observed that it is possible for two different users to open the same transaction simultaneously and make changes to the fields. This raises the question of how ABBYY Vantage handles concurrent edits.
- Does ABBYY Vantage provide a locking mechanism to restrict access to a transaction already being edited by another user?
- What happens if two operators modify the same transaction fields concurrently? Is there a risk of overwriting or losing data?
If anyone has encountered this scenario or has insights into best practices for preventing such conflicts, I’d appreciate your input. Are there configuration options or workflows that can address this issue effectively?
Looking forward to your thoughts and suggestions!
Thank you
Comments
3 comments
I guess you referring to Manual reviewing, Are you using any 3rd party solution to integrate like a RPA solution? If yes then you can use it as a workaround to queue each transaction Item, this can prevent 2 people working on same transaction.
Am available to assist further
Thank you for your response John, and apologies for my delayed reply. You are correct—I was referring to manual review. We are currently using an external ERP to manage new transactions via the Vantage API. I'm aiming for a simple yet effective solution and would greatly value your expert opinion and assistance.
One idea I have so far is to create an additional status field in our system's transaction list. This status would include the user ID and a timestamp indicating when the link was opened. Additionally, I propose adding a token with a configurable expiration time to flag that someone has the link open.
However, I acknowledge this is not a perfect solution because it does not account for scenarios where a user opens and closes the link immediately. The ideal solution would involve tracking active user sessions connected to a specific transaction. While this approach would provide more robust control, it would require additional implementation effort and complexity.
Do you think the current idea could serve as a temporary workaround, or would you recommend focusing on the more comprehensive session-based approach? I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Hi Viktor, apologies for getting back to you this late.
The workaround you decided to implement is a good approach, however if I can suggest that you create a one single webpage that we list all the review link, then whenever some clicks and open a link that becomes disabled and unavailable for someone else to click, you can include a column that shows links that are active / completed.
I hope this make sense to you, we can connect and have more dicussion around this if you wish.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ojcool/
Thanks
Please sign in to leave a comment.