Hi,

> Hi,

> though a 'select ... for update' statement is allowed in
> SQL and accepted outside an 'declare cursor' statement, it has no
> effect on locking the selected row[s] as it has e.g. in ORACLE.

> Since I have to connect to FIREBIRD and/or ORACLE from one
> application, life would be easier if both would behave in the same
> way.

> So is this a 'misbehaviour' of firbird supposed to be changed or is
> ORACLE (V8) to blame?

Firebird is a multi-generational architecture(MGA) database server. What
that means, is that a record contains multiple versions of itself when
being edited, so this means(I think I got it right) that more than one
person can work on the same record and the last one to commit makes
the changes. Oracle only started to introduce this architecture
recently and I don't think it's in version 8. You can find more
information on MGA on www.ibphoenix.com.

And, as Alexander mentioned, Firebird 1.5 has the new keyword to be
able to lock the record on updating.

Daniel Rail
Senior System Engineer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.accramed.ca)