Is the relative clause a defining relative clause or non-defining?
So the isolation property too is really more of a desideratum than an ironclad guarantee: What is more, real-world systems typically provide explicit mechanisms namely, isolation levels lower than the maximum--whose effect is precisely to undermine isolation.
Introduction to Database Systems, J. Date
I agree.
Now if we say "What is more, real-world systems typically provide explicit mechanisms whose effect is precisely to undermine isolation", are there other explicit mechanisms that have other effects?
Clive
I really don't know whether or not there are other explicit mechanisms that have other effects.
no other explicit mechanisms Then it is not a defining clause.
other explicit mechanisms Then it is a defining clause
In my opinion, it's a poorly written sentence because the dash just tacks on what follows as an after-thought and leaves the reader trying to figure out what the writer meant. A comma instead of a dash is a lot easier to interpret.
What is more, real-world systems typically provide explicit mechanisms comma namely isolation levels lower than the maximum, whose effect is precisely to undermine isolation.
Clive
Explicit mechanisms
Many thanks, Clive!
I really don't know there are other explicit mechanisms that have other effects or not
From the sentence isn't this clear, please?
Many thanks Clive for the excellent explanation!!!