Talk:Multiple granularity locking

Unclear. Misses the point. Needs immediate rewrite.

Comps (talk) 00:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The abbreviations are not defined. This is a glaring mistake and needs to be rewritten. JesseBikman (talk) 23:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

SIX and intentional locks
The article would benefit from pointing out that despite the name, intentional "locks" are not really locks, but only a way to denote that a lock of the specified type is, or shortly will be, added somewhere in the hierarchy below. This change will allow the reader to more easily understand the compatibility table.

Additionally, "SIX" is mentioned without explanation. After we clear up the explanation of intentional "locks", we should also clarify that "SIX" means "shared lock and exclusive intentional (lock)" or whatever wording is more compatible with the improved explanation of intentional locks. Jasonnet (talk) 18:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)