----------------------------------------------------------- New Message on BDOTNET
----------------------------------------------------------- From: _SQL_Vinod_ Message 10 in Discussion >> if one of the transaction is updating the data then other transaction should be >> >> able to read the last committed data not the uncommitted data This is not a >> supported behaviour in this present version of SQL Server 2000. You cannot get this >> beaviour. And this is exactly what I explained in my previous post also. But this >> is surely in the next version of the SQL Server. Now adding to the post where you >> put a UPDLOCK, this table hint will force you to take a IU lock at the row. A table >> hint at the update statement will escalate anyway to an "Exclusive" lock (X-type >> locks). Understand this will not be an Intend lock. And you must be aware that X >> locks are not compatible with Shared locks (required for selects) under an >> Transaction Isolation level of read committed. This is by design and the >> architecture supports this behaviour only ... Thanks, HTH, Vinod Kumar MVP - SQL >> Server www.ExtremeExperts.com ----------------------------------------------------------- To stop getting this e-mail, or change how often it arrives, go to your E-mail Settings. http://groups.msn.com/BDOTNET/_emailsettings.msnw Need help? If you've forgotten your password, please go to Passport Member Services. http://groups.msn.com/_passportredir.msnw?ppmprop=help For other questions or feedback, go to our Contact Us page. http://groups.msn.com/contact If you do not want to receive future e-mail from this MSN group, or if you received this message by mistake, please click the "Remove" link below. On the pre-addressed e-mail message that opens, simply click "Send". Your e-mail address will be deleted from this group's mailing list. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
