Re: AccessShareLock question

On Saturday 19 December 2009 12:45:15 pm Clayton Graf wrote:
> I think I got it...
>
> I was just using
>
> select * from table1;
> select * from table2;
> select * from tablen;
>
> instead of
>
> begin;
> select * from table1;
> select * from table2;
> select * from tablen;
> commit;
>
> Using MS-SQLSERVER the begin trans is "implicit" at first update or delete
> command. It is not necessary to "worry" about selects before the first
> update or delete command. I got confused but I understand now. I guess :-)
>
> Thank you,
>
> Clayton
>
>

Now I am the one that is confused. In the first example the three SELECT
statements are each a transaction. In the second case you have wrapped them in
one transaction. In either case they are still acquiring an AccessShareLock. I
thought the issue was with an ALTER TABLE statement not UPDATES/DELETES.

--
Adrian Klaver
aklaver(at)comcast(dot)net