Timeline for Dirty Read on SQL Server
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2017 at 19:38 | comment | added | Scott Hodgin - Retired | From the documentation that I linked to, that is my understanding. You should be able to 'test' that theory by beginning a transaction in another query window and apply some sort of update to one of the underlying tables in the view. Then, in another query window, see if you can select from the view after setting read uncommitted at the connection level. Don't forget to rollback the transaction that you began. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 19:31 | comment | added | Tommy | Thanks Scott for your reply. So, my question is that will the tables inside the view inherit the "dirty read" option as well if "NOLOCK" is not added as my entire block of code is started with "set transaction isolation level read uncommitted". Or do I still need to explicitly say "NOLOCK" in the view. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 18:18 | history | edited | Scott Hodgin - Retired | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 424 characters in body
|
| Jan 30, 2017 at 18:09 | history | answered | Scott Hodgin - Retired | CC BY-SA 3.0 |