Hi Jose, >From my test on MaxDB 7.5.0.8, your desired behavior can be "partially" achieved by >using isolation level 15.
I mean "partial" because when T1 attempts DML (Insert, Update, Delete) later - to the "locked" row or other rows, to the same table or other tables - there is an automatic lock escalation on the previously acquired lock (select ... with lock isolation 15), and it becomes exclusive. Therefore, other selects may then become blocked. Regards, Andy -----Original Message----- From: Jos�� R��mulo El��as Contreras [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 2004?3?24? 7:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Question About Locks? Hi: I have two connections with isolation level = 0. In the two connection I will update the same table row. The first connection with Transaction T1 update the table row and after of execute the update statement assign an EXCLUSIVE lock to this row. The second connection with Transaction T2 tried to update this table row, but when I execute the update satement it has to wait that T1 make a rollback or a commit. Why is this behavior, if isolation level 0 is able to READ and MODIFY data no matter if it is committed/rollbacked/locked/not locked? Am I in the correct way? thanks Jos� R�mulo El�as Contreras Ingeniero en Sistemas Computacionales Guadalajara, Jalisco Tel: (33) 3126-47-81 y 3126-48-13 Cel: (311) 910-50-59 _________________________________________________________________ �nete al mayor servicio mundial de correo electr�nico: http://www.hotmail.com -- MaxDB Discussion Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/maxdb To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MaxDB Discussion Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/maxdb To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
