Subject | Re: How to implement SQLServer's WITH(NOLOCK) statment? |
---|---|
Author | real_yoni |
Post date | 2008-04-14T13:22:59Z |
I would argue that in certain types of applications knowing that you
can achive the "C" with code logic, dirty reads can lead to a
significant performance boost...
Yoni.
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Helen Borrie <helebor@...>
wrote:
ACID stands for "consistency", which is not achievable in a database
engine that allows (or cannot avoid) Dirty Reads.
the work committed by others immediately and will respond to those
changes if required, according to its own transaction parameters.
can achive the "C" with code logic, dirty reads can lead to a
significant performance boost...
Yoni.
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Helen Borrie <helebor@...>
wrote:
>read
> At 10:32 PM 14/04/2008, you wrote:
>
> >I need a clarification... NOLOCK enables the SELECT statments to
> >uncommitted data. That is: if another process runs an UPDATEstatment
> >the SELECT statment will not get locked.default
> >
> >This is what SQL Server calls a hint which override the default
> >behaviour (read committed and get locked)
> >
> >Does firebird support this? If not can I make sure that the
> >behaviour would be "read uncommited"?never-ever-ever. It's a plus, not a "missing feature"! The "C" in
>
> No, Firebird does not support Dirty Read under any circumstances,
ACID stands for "consistency", which is not achievable in a database
engine that allows (or cannot avoid) Dirty Reads.
>uncommitted work of others. A Read Committed transaction can read
> A transaction can read its own uncommitted work but never the
the work committed by others immediately and will respond to those
changes if required, according to its own transaction parameters.
>we can advise you on the transaction parameters you need...
> It seems you still need to tell us what you want to achieve so that
>
> ./heLen
>