Re: Locking in SQL Server
From: Tibor Karaszi (tibor_please.no.email_karaszi_at_hotmail.nomail.com)
Date: 10/07/04
- Next message: Tibor Karaszi: "Re: trigger quiz"
- Previous message: Alec MacLean: "Re: Turning rows into columns."
- In reply to: sansaw80: "Re: Locking in SQL Server"
- Next in thread: Guido Stepken: "Re: Locking in SQL Server"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 19:14:23 +0200
I'm afraid that it is difficult to assist more regarding your PM. If he doesn't want to believe that
this is how the product work, well...
> Just for my knowledge I would
> like to know, is this kind of Isolation level is already provided in Oracle,
> Sybase, DB2 etc??
I know it is in Oracle.
I don't think it is in Oracle or DB2, but someone would have to confirm that...
-- Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/ "sansaw80" <sansaw80@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:45132349-E47F-41DD-B483-C36293E3FD58@microsoft.com... > Hi Tibor, > > You are right and I completely agree with you. But the problem is my PM is a > guy from our client and I tried to explain him by showing BOL and books etc. > But I think main problem is, this is his first proj on SQL server and MS > technologies, he is basically Java, DB2, AS400 guy. > > Well I didn't manage to find exact document but information you provided on > Yukon had helped me a lot because many sites including MS site explains why > SNAPSHOT isolation level is being introduce. Just for my knowledge I would > like to know, is this kind of Isolation level is already provided in Oracle, > Sybase, DB2 etc?? > > Many thanks in advance. > > "Tibor Karaszi" wrote: > >> > By any chance is any of you knows any web site - document from >> > which I can prove that it is not possible >> >> If your manager understand locking, he/she will understand why it isn't possible. If your manager >> doesn't understand locking, then he/she will not understand such a "proof" either. I haven't seen >> such a proof explicitly defined, and I fail to see how you would phrase such a statement. You can >> point your manager to Books Online and ask how your manager proposes this to be implemented. >> >> Btw, you are using the term "Deadlock" incorrectly in your original post. What you see there is a >> blocking. A deadlock is a different things (when you have two connections blocking each other) >> and >> such are resolved by SQL Server within a few seconds. >> >> SQL Server 2005 will have snapshot isolation where you work in a freezed time. This means that >> others can modify data, but you are seeing what the system looked like at an earlier point in >> time. >> >> -- >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/ >> >> >> "sansaw80" <sansaw80@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >> news:00A6F807-D518-46BC-A7A7-DC9A5B804992@microsoft.com... >> > Thanks all for replying to my question. I know all of you are right and what >> > I want to do is fundamentally not possible. Even when I put this question I >> > was 90%sure it is not possible but my PM thinks, it is possible (How? He >> > doesn't know). By any chance is any of you knows any web site - document from >> > which I can prove that it is not possible. By any chance is this feature will >> > be provided in Yukun (SQL Server 2005) any comments? >> > >> > "sansaw80" wrote: >> > >> >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> I got basic question about locking. I want while one user is updating a >> >> data, other user should able to read a data (NOT DIRTY DATA). For example: >> >> >> >> Say User A issues the following command: >> >> Use Northwind >> >> Go >> >> >> >> Begin Transaction >> >> Update Region with Set RegionDescription = 'South' where RegionID = 4 >> >> >> >> At this stage User has not closed the transaction. That means User A either >> >> Commit or Roll back. >> >> >> >> At the same time User B issues the following command: (When User A >> >> transaction is open) >> >> Use Northwind >> >> Go >> >> >> >> Select * From Region >> >> >> >> >> >> In this case User B goes into Deadlock situation. But what I want is User B >> >> should able to read the data from the table but data before Update not Dirty >> >> data. >> >> >> >> I tried using UPDLOCK with Update statement but found out User B command >> >> still goes in Deadlock situation. Only way I could able to execute User B >> >> command was use either NOLOCK or READPAST. But none of them serves my purpose. >> >> NOLOCK - gives me Dirty data and READPAST - ignore lock record and shows >> >> rest of the data. >> >> >> >> Please can anyone tell me is there any way to solve this problem. Or am I >> >> doing something wrong here? >> >> >> >> Many thanks in advance. >> >> >> >> >>
- Next message: Tibor Karaszi: "Re: trigger quiz"
- Previous message: Alec MacLean: "Re: Turning rows into columns."
- In reply to: sansaw80: "Re: Locking in SQL Server"
- Next in thread: Guido Stepken: "Re: Locking in SQL Server"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
