Disadvantage when set read_committed_snapshot ON in sql2005 std edition

I'mn using sql2005 std edition, the db is very heavy with insert at every mins and sec's. and due to this behaviors I will plan to ON the read_committed_snapshot. We understands when we use this isolation level it allow us more concurrency. But I heard less disadvantages of using this option. One thing I know it require additional space in Tempdb for Version Store.
Can someone here tell me other advantages of using this option ?
If we have multiple read operation ( same query )  in the database, will it provide us with same results ?
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

I used Snapshot isolation level in one of our production SP's to allow more concurrancy. As it does not apply any locks on the dataset its perfect in that kind of a scenario. But recently I ran in to a problem with updating same row in a table by multiple transactions. As there are no locks it rollsbacks the second transaction. So to fix this issue I had to use a UPDLOCK on that table update statement. This is something you should think about as well.

Also here is a good article I ran in to with Pro's and Cons of snapshot isoloation level. Bit scary though...


Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
lcohanDatabase AnalystCommented:
There are many PROs and CONs however from my 10+ years experience with SQL I recommend not changing the default SQL isolation level and instead use the WITH(NOLOCK) hint in your SELECTs and WITH(ROWLOCK) in your UPDATE/DELETEs to eliminate the locking and blocking in SQL. Avoid using NOLOCK only if atomic transactions are mandatory.
Even though this may require code sweep and potentially lots of changes it's much more worth it in my opinion from performance/scalability point of view than read_committed_snapshot even though...it appears to be the recommended OLTP db setting.
NOLOCK is at the statement level vs. read_committed_snapshot at the DB level.

It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Microsoft SQL Server

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.