Re: sql and nolock -- MIDRANGE-L

Good News Everybody!

The new search engine is LIVE!

Please report any problems to david (at) midrange.com.

Subject: Re: sql and nolock
From: dlclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:11:58 -0500
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.lists.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

"MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 11/22/2019
03:02:35 PM:

Depends on the isolation level...

At "no commit" which I suspect is what the majority used, then no

selects

don't lock the data.

Exception, where I would use a "for read only" is when defining a

cursor...

Yes, in general we employ commitment control and units of work. We
have adopted COMMIT = *CHG (previously *CS, which caused us headaches
because some programmers did not use "FOR READ ONLY").

Sincerely,

Dave Clark

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.