NoLocks // 1.9.8b10 adoption of record locks. Feedback

[erne]

Hi Ruslan,

on 8-07-2003 14:33, Ruslan Zasukhin at sunshine at public.kherson.ua wrote:

>> I'm sorry to be pedantic as usual,
>> but I can't see this Read committed behaviour in current implementation
> 
> Erne,
> 
> But Isolation level is far far not the same as just record locking.
> Transaction mechanism use many other helper structures.
> 

Well, you did point me in that direction
and I liked what I saw :-)

Anyway we're talking about scrollable cursors' expected behaviour
inside a given isolation level

so I think that's something to put in the todo list anyway
(if you want support transactions, as I believe)

Again, that's not that I want it by tomorrow
but if you're building foundations to transactions
smart and (hopefully) dynamic cursors is cornerstone IMHO


Cool Runnings,
Erne.

-- 
|  e r  |  Ernesto Giannotta
|  n e  |  Musical Box - a media store