Is it possible you have Snapshot isolation enabled?

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Simon Fox
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:17 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [nhusers] nolock, Read Uncommitted and sp_executesql

 

Now I'm really confused, can someone please explain why when this line of
code executes

 

using (var transaction =
_session.Transaction.Begin(IsolationLevel.ReadUncommitted))

 

SQL profiler logs the following

 

-- network protocol: LPC

set quoted_identifier on

set arithabort off

set numeric_roundabort off

set ansi_warnings on

set ansi_padding on

set ansi_nulls on

set concat_null_yields_null on

set cursor_close_on_commit off

set implicit_transactions off

set language us_english

set dateformat mdy

set datefirst 7

set transaction isolation level read committed

 

Thanks

Simon

 

/*
Email: [email protected]

Twitter: @simonmfox
Phone: +64 21 079 2900
*/





On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Simon Fox <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes so did, that is what makes me think that sp_executesql is not honouring
the isolation level of the transaction I have wrapped my query in.

 

When running the exact sql NH executes from a command line (wrapped in Read
Uncommitted transaction) app I see the same timeout issue. However if I put
nolock in to the query there is no timeout, and if I pull the query out of
sp_executesql and replace the placeholders with their actual values the
query runs fine as well...

 

I'm stumped, can't find much info on sp_executesql, but I'm assuming it is
the problem.


/*
Email: [email protected]

Twitter: @simonmfox
Phone: +64 21 079 2900 <tel:%2B64%2021%20079%202900> 
*/





On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Rodrigo Silva de Andrade
<[email protected]> wrote:

i thought read uncommitted and nolock had the same effect

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Simon Fox <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi All

 

We have recently found that a combination of where clause parameters (which
results in minimal filtering) on one of our queries is resulting in sql
timeouts in our application.

 

We are happy to do dirty reads in this situation and so I initially just
wrapped the query in a ReadUncommitted transaction...but the timeouts kept
happening for this specific clause.

 

Next thing I did was write a simple little console app to execute the same
query that NHibernate was generating which confirmed that it wasn't some
other issue within our application or the web server.

 

What in did make the query work without timeout was explictly adding nolock
hints to the query generated by NHibernate and pumping that through my
console app.

 

So I have a couple of queries really. First a more general query about
sp_executesql (as I believed and currently still do believe that nolock
hints and Read Uncommitted have the same effect), does this SP use the
database default transaction isolation level and even though I have wrapped
the query in a Read Uncommitted transaction it is falling back to Read
Committed thus causing the timeout.

 

The query NHibernate generates is via ICriteria, I can't seem to find a way
to get nolock hints added to that query. Is there a way I can get a query
which includes nolock with ICriteria (without writing an interceptor)? Is
there a way I can get NHibernate to issue the query outside of sp_executesql
(because I believe that is ignoring my transaction isolation level)?

 

Any other suggestions are welcomed.

 

Thanks

Simon


/*
Email: [email protected]

Twitter: @simonmfox
Phone: +64 21 079 2900 <tel:%2B64%2021%20079%202900> 
*/

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"nhusers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:nhusers%[email protected]> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"nhusers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:nhusers%[email protected]> .
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.

 

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"nhusers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"nhusers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en.

Reply via email to