Is NOLOCK the default for SELECT statements in SQL Server 2005? -
i have sql server 2008r2 installed though need communicate customers having 2005.
[1] tells:
"nolock
this not lock object. default select operations. not apply insert, update, , delete statements"
[2] doesn't seem mention it, checking in ssms/ss 2008r2 shows nolock not default hint select.
is with(nolock) default in sql server 2005 select?
written in bol2005/2008?
update:
under "where written" expected see answers/comments/clarifications (or, better, citations) on cited [1] parts:
"this not lock object"
does select without nolock put any locks in sql server 2005 (having default isolation level read uncommitted)?
... in sql server 2008 (resp. having read committed)?what have read on can understood nolock permits ignore/bypass existing locks put transaction... quite unclear whether current transaction (select nolock) puts (or trying put) own locks...
does read uncommitted isolation level (which used synonym using nolock hint) imply absence of locking?
"it not apply insert, update, , delete statements"
seems correct?
because (insert, update, , delete) lock select doesn't?
etc.
[1]
http://blog.sqlauthority.com/2007/04/27/sql-server-2005-locking-hints-and-examples/
[2]
sql server 2005 books online. table hint (transact-sql)
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187373(sql.90).aspx
see duplicate
nolock not default , can not set such. sql authority link plainly wrong.
Comments
Post a Comment