Subject Re: Viewing Database Changes
Author Todd Brasseur
Another poster suggested we drop the BDE and go to IBObjects. We are
generally very happy with both Interbase and the BDE. Our application
is developed using C++ Builder and Interbase (via BDE).

I was told that the reason we are using the BDE is because it would
make it very easy to move to another database (SQL Server or Oracle).
That we would have to re-code the database but do virtually nothing
with the Interface. We have some larger clients who have these
databases as their 'standard' and would like us to change.

My question is:

1) Would our problem go away if we used IB Objects? (Users not seeing
changes that others made)
2) Does the BDE make it easier to move to another database?
3) Would we be happy with our application if it was the BDE and SQL
Server or would we have the same problem?


--- In ib-support@y..., "Ann W. Harrison" <aharrison@i...> wrote:
> Sigh. Since you're using BDE, I should probably let someone
> else answer this, but basically, here's the deal. InterBase
> is a database which provides ACID transactions. One of the
> aspects of aCidity is that within a transaction, data is Consistent.
> The right answer:
> To see new data, start a new transaction.
> The pragmatic answer:
> InterBase does make some (in my mind unwise) compromises to
> work the way non-database people think. You should set good
> old BDE to read committed, shadow, wait.
> Regards,
> Ann
> We have answers.