Subject Re: [IB-Architect] Re: [IB-Priorities] Isolation level implemetation
Author Ivan Prenosil
> From: 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.

I have a field in the table that is filled by trigger to keep
track of who last modified the record. (i.e. NEW.MyField=USER)
By looking at the record under Read Uncommitted transaction,
I whould be able to find out who is currently updating that record.

Because it seems that I am the only one who whould like to retrieve
such kind of info from IB, it is not worth the effort to implement
some support for it, be it special function (much nicer)
or Read Uncommitted (much easier).