At what level are you looking at this problem?

For example SQL Server has native support for cursors and locks: you could 
(again, for example) ensure that every record in your SELECT statement is clean 
(RepeatableRead), i.e. no one else has changed a record even whilst SQL Server 
is assembling the result set. However, this isn't particularly helpful if you 
then disconnect the dataset (e.g. display the results in a web page), and allow 
the user some minutes to make changes before then putting the changes back into 
the DB.

Cheers
Ken

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Wallace Turner
Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2013 12:54 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: sql server concurrency and 'conflicting' updates

i have googled a bit for this but fear i am missing an important keyword.

What methods are used to handle concurrent updates in sql server? That is, two 
users editing the same 'thing'.

The way ravenDB does it [1] looks good to me. What support is there for 
approaches of this type (using etags) in sql server?

Could you also discuss what you allow the end users to see/do? eg are they 
given options to 'ignore clash and override'

[1]: http://ravendb.net/docs/http-api/http-api-comcurrency

Reply via email to