Alexandre Benson Smith wrote:

>
> I am sure it was asked a bunch of times... But since I don't remeber any
> answer for this, I will ask it again (pardon me if it is repetitive).
>
> But there is any reason let the user specify some option to do a "dirty
> read" to make possible to the triggers to run in a system like transaction ?
>

That wouldn't work - and it wouldn't be the right thing to do, in my
opinion. Triggers and procedures should operate in the client context.
Rick's problem is that as currently implemented, foreign keys interact
badly with a design flaw in the index code. The right solution is to
fix the index implementation - as has been done in V2.0 - and consider
a more abstract implementation of foreign keys that isn't tied into the
index implementation, as will be done in the future.

When I say it wouldn't work, what I mean is that the system transaction
has a lot of context around the current state of transactions and the
ability to wait for the resolution of potential conflicts. It's actions
are also constrained by the coding of the engine. Putting that kind of
power in a client option would be like handing an ax to a four year old.

(Hmmm... does she consider the average Firebird programmer to be the
equivalent of a four-year-old? No, she just has a bad cold and it's
making her [even more] cranky.)

Cheers,


Ann