Solved

SPID Locks

Posted on 2006-06-29
8
536 Views
Last Modified: 2010-08-05
My application ceases to respond when an spid XX (blocked) occurs on SQL Server 2000 sp4 .(XX being the number assigned to the user/query) My dot.NET application does not require table or row locks when any "Select" statement is used. Can I resolve this in the application code.

1.  Will the use of "NO LOCK" in queries resolve the 'blocking'/"blocked" problem at SQL level.

2.  Is there a way of setting up SQL to ensure there are no table locks for all queries from the application.

I have 250 users on the systems currently, hence this is urgent and valued at 500. We have just updated to sp4. Had no problems with  previous SQL 2000 installation.

Thanks  
0
Comment
Question by:JenebyM
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
8 Comments
 
LVL 75

Accepted Solution

by:
Aneesh Retnakaran earned 500 total points
ID: 17015596
JenebyM,
> 1.  Will the use of "NO LOCK" in queries resolve the 'blocking'/"blocked"  problem at SQL level.

NOLOCK is same as ANSI defined isolation level 'read uncommitted', It means that a transaction running under this isolation level can read data modified by transactions that have not yet committed.  A query that runs under NOLOCK or read uncommitted isolation level, it will not get blocked by concurrent updates.

0
 
LVL 18

Expert Comment

by:ShogunWade
ID: 17015682
concur with above.      If when you establish your connectiions you issue SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION READ UNCOMMITTED it will avoid blocking,   but you need to be careful about dirty yreads  (See BOL for details).  Additionalliy you may want to look at what commands are issued to the instance via profiler and see it you can optimise performance,  this the faste the response, the less impact locking has.

BEWARE - If you open a ADO.NET transation and dont specify the isolation level it will set the isolation levelback to read committed.
0
 

Author Comment

by:JenebyM
ID: 17015756
The above addresses part #1 in my question to some extent. Before I attempt the resolution however can you comment on part 2 of the question.

This is because I would like to avoid changes application source code, i.e to then specify isolation level on the ado.net transaction instances on the entrie souce code.

Will the following permanently achieve the same effect of avoiding blocking if I run this script on the database.

USE KENDB
GO
SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ UNCOMMITTED
GO
DBCC USEROPTIONS
GO

0
Efficient way to get backups off site to Azure

This user guide provides instructions on how to deploy and configure both a StoneFly Scale Out NAS Enterprise Cloud Drive virtual machine and Veeam Cloud Connect in the Microsoft Azure Cloud.

 
LVL 75

Expert Comment

by:Aneesh Retnakaran
ID: 17015776
0
 
LVL 18

Expert Comment

by:ShogunWade
ID: 17015783
No it wont.    At least Not if you have a


.BeginTransation() call in your client.      If you dont stipulate the issolatin level in such a command it is hard coded to set the isolation level back to READ COMMITTED.
0
 

Author Comment

by:JenebyM
ID: 17015885

I assume that if the isolation level of ALL .BeginTransaction() call is set to "readuncommitted" in the dot.NET apps then the SQL Server isolation level will remain readuncommitted.

Is this assumption correct.
0
 
LVL 18

Expert Comment

by:ShogunWade
ID: 17038857
Sorry,  Ive been away for a few days....



"I assume that if the isolation level of ALL .BeginTransaction() call is set to "readuncommitted" in the dot.NET apps then the SQL Server isolation level will remain readuncommitted."
Yes You're correct .
0
 

Author Comment

by:JenebyM
ID: 17039635
We now have a much more serious situation.i.e Speed/Performance.

The machine which had the dot.Net apps and SQL Server 2000 crashed last week. We have a new machine that is of a higher specification than the previous machine but the performance is so bad that the application is unusable.

The things I have checked on the new machine include:
updating to Win 2000 sp4
updating SQL Server to sp4
updating MDAC_TYPE to 2.8
updating to .netfx 1.1
Web.Config & machine.config files
Database table re-indexing (2gb database)
and more

Any obvious things I should look for when a dot.NET web apps cannot connect to SQL Server 2000 at a resonable speed.

 
0

Featured Post

Edgartown IT Case Study

Learn about Edgartown's quest to ensure the safety and security of the entire town's employee and citizen data. Read the case study!

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Everyone has problem when going to load data into Data warehouse (EDW). They all need to confirm that data quality is good but they don't no how to proceed. Microsoft has provided new task within SSIS 2008 called "Data Profiler Task". It solve th…
A Stored Procedure in Microsoft SQL Server is a powerful feature that it can be used to execute the Data Manipulation Language (DML) or Data Definition Language (DDL). Depending on business requirements, a single Stored Procedure can return differe…
This videos aims to give the viewer a basic demonstration of how a user can query current session information by using the SYS_CONTEXT function
Viewers will learn how the fundamental information of how to create a table.

696 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question