Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support explicit record lock/unlock [CORE589] #945

Closed
firebird-automations opened this issue Jul 31, 2001 · 6 comments
Closed

Support explicit record lock/unlock [CORE589] #945

firebird-automations opened this issue Jul 31, 2001 · 6 comments

Comments

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator

Submitted by: Sean Leyne (seanleyne)

Is related to QA71

SFID: 446255#⁠
Submitted By: seanleyne

?

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Commented by: Alice F. Bird (firebirds)

Date: 2003-01-17 18:19
Sender: skidder
Logged In: YES
user_id=495356

Explicit locks are implemented in Firebird 1.5.
Explicit unlock doesn't fit transaction model well.
If you need Oracle DBMS_LOCK-like locking create an UDF for
it.

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Commented by: Alice F. Bird (firebirds)

Date: 2002-03-14 23:47
Sender: mweissenbacher
Logged In: YES
user_id=231195

record versioning is the most powerful feature in firebird/interbase. i
don't think it would do any good allowing explicit locking.

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Commented by: Alice F. Bird (firebirds)

Date: 2002-03-14 10:30
Sender: marcodugoni
Logged In: YES
user_id=113954

Sorry, I disagree with this one.
The automatic versioning system in IB/FB is powerful and
clean.
No need for explicit locking...

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Modified by: @pcisar

Workflow: jira [ 10613 ] => Firebird [ 14955 ]

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Modified by: @pcisar

Link: This issue is related to QA71 [ QA71 ]

@firebird-automations
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Modified by: @pavel-zotov

QA Status: No test

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant