Subject Re: [IB-Architect] Re: [IB-Priorities] Isolation level implemetation
Author Ann W. Harrison
At 06:44 PM 12/21/2000 +0100, Ivan Prenosil wrote:

>I personally do not _need_ READ UNCOMMITTED isloation level...
>- because I can imagine _useful_ using of such "feature"
> i.e. finding out who has updated and not committed specific record,
> which is operation that requires by its nature looking at uncommitted
> data or some internal structures.
> Of course some special function to retrieve such kind of info
> would be better (or at least would not irritate some people ... :-).

I guess I don't understand why read-uncommitted would give you any
information about a locked up record. When you read a committed
record, you don't know who committed it. Why should uncommitted
records be different.

It would be possible - perhaps even easy - to write a utility function
that wrote out the id of clients that have held a lock for more than
10 seconds. The information is all in the lock table.


We have answers.