Subject Re: [IBO] transaction behavior
Author James
Hi guys.

Lester Caine wrote:

> Helen Borrie wrote:
> >>>No. Transactions can never see the uncommitted work of other
> >>>transactions. That is known as "dirty read" and Firebird/IB do not
> >>>support
> >>>it (and never will).
> >>
> >>What do you mean by FB do not support it?
> >
> > I mean that Firebird does not support Dirty Read and it never will.
> Put it
> > another way, one Firebird transaction can not see the uncommitted
> work of
> > another Firebird transaction. It is designed that way
> deliberately. What
> > more can I say?
> The question should probably be "Why do you have two transactions?"
> I only use a second transaction when I want to load up background
> records which I know the first transaction does not need to worry about
> until they are committed :)
> --
> Lester Caine
> -----------------------------
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services

Thanks Helen for making things clear.

Good question Lester. As I answer my question why I need two
ib_transactions, hope I might get an idea from you for my problem. I
have a master detail setup in my application, wherein I used to check
for possible duplicate records before saving the new record. As we know
IBO has a feature called post retaining in master detail setup, if the
dataset that will use to search for possible duplicate is attach to the
same ib_transaction, the answer will be always yes since there is post
retaining that is perform. Hope somebody have similiar situation with me
and has a better solution for this =).