You have the following requirements: - Your transaction only queries the table, and requires a consistent set of the table's data for the duration of the transaction. - You can hold up other…

You have the following requirements:

• Your transaction only queries the table, and requires a consistent

set of the table's data for the duration of the transaction.

• You can hold up other transactions that try to update the locked

table, until all transactions that hold SHARE locks on the table either commit or roll back.

• Other transactions may acquire concurrent SHARE table locks on the

same table, also allowing them the option of transaction-level read consistency. Which type of locking strategy would you select to achieve this?