To NOLOCK or NOT to NOLOCK, that is the question
Posted
by
Limey
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Limey
Published on 2011-01-03T18:48:13Z
Indexed on
2011/01/03
18:54 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 182
sql-server
Hi all,
This is really more of a discussion than a specific question about nolock.
I took over an app recently that almost every query (and there are lots of them) has the nolock option on them. Now I am pretty new to SQL server (used Oracle for 10 years) but yet I find this pretty disturbing. So this weekend I was talking with one of my friends who runs a rather large ecommerce site (name will be withheld to protect the guilty) and he says he has to do this with all of his SQL servers cause he will always end in deadlocks.
Is this just a huge short fall with SQL server? Is this just a failure in the DB design (mine is not 3rd level, but its close) Is anybody out there running an SQL server app without nolocks? These are issues that Oracle handles better with more grandulare recordlocks.
Is SQL server just not able to handle big loads? Is there some better workaround than reading uncommited data? I would love to hear what people think.
Thanks
© Stack Overflow or respective owner