Post reply

Shared lock in DataBase

  • March 12, 2008 at 11:00 am

    #95894

    Changing transaction level to Read Uncommitted will solve this problem?Is it true.

    If yes please let me know how to set the transaction level globally to Read Uncommited in MSSql server.

    If not is there any other way to solve this locking issue.

    thanks,

    Vivek

  • March 12, 2008 at 12:31 pm

    #788737

    Globally setting your isolation level to read uncommitted will prevent SELECTS from using shared locks; however, the side effect will be that you are allowing for dirty reads. I would carefully consider the impact this may have on your system before making a global change like this. I would suggest trying to use the NOLOCK hint where needed instead. If you have a certain query that you know is long running and you don't want it to lock the data and you are OK with your query reading dirty data, then use NOLOCK. But then again, if you have a long running query, why is it taking so long to run?

    I think you would get some better advice if you described your problem in a bit more detail. There are proabaly a number of things you can do to help in place of making such a drastic, global change.

    John Rowan

    ======================================================
    ======================================================
    Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help[/url] - by Jeff Moden

  • March 12, 2008 at 11:00 pm

    #788887

    Thanks John,

    I am using hibernate(orm) to access the db. I tried changing the jdbc driver to jTDS and was working fine with default isolation level. Maybe a bug in microsoft jdbc driver.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply