I have reviewed the attached html and it is right. I will let the
normal doc committers look at the source diff portion.
Eric Radzinski (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-678?page=all ]
Eric Radzinski updated DERBY-678:
---------------------------------
Attachment: derby678.diff
cdevconcepts842385.html
Attached patch address the bug that's identified in this issue. HTML file is
included for review.
derby documentation does not reflect changes to update lock behavior
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: DERBY-678
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-678
Project: Derby
Type: Bug
Components: Documentation
Versions: 10.0.2.0
Reporter: Mike Matrigali
Fix For: 10.2.0.0
Attachments: cdevconcepts842385.html, derby678.diff
The following section in the developers guide on update locks needs to be
changed from:
When a user-defined update cursor (created with the FOR UPDATE clause) reads
data, its transaction obtains an update lock on the data. If the user-defined
update cursor updates the data, the update lock is converted to an exclusive
lock. If the cursor does not update the row, when the transaction steps through
to the next row, transactions using the TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED isolation
level release the lock, and transactions using the TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE or
TRANSACTION_REPEATABLE_READ isolation level downgrade it to a shared lock until
the transaction is committed. (For update locks, the
TRANSACTION_READ_UNCOMMITTED isolation level acts the same way as
TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED.)
to:
When a user-defined update cursor (created with the FOR UPDATE clause) reads
data, its transaction obtains an update lock on the data. If the user-defined
update cursor updates the data, the update lock is converted to an exclusive
lock. If the cursor does not update the row, when the transaction steps through
to the next row, transactions using the TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED isolation
level release the lock.
(For update locks, the TRANSACTION_READ_UNCOMMITTED isolation level acts the
same way as TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED.)
