Hibernate 2.1.6


MS SQL Server 2000


Hi there,
I'd like to ask for help to master concurrent access to SQL Server 2000 when updating records:

Inside a transaction, I need to update 5 records (representing steps in a workflow) in a multi user environment.

When using JDBC statements (i.e. without using the Hibernate library), I am setting an integer lock column in each record to "1" for all the records involved to notify other users not to modify them.

Therefore when using the Hibernate data aware class, I set the member field for the 5 class instances to "1", as well. But can please somebody help and tell me how to promote the information "lock column set to 1" to the SQL Server database while the transaction is running ?

Thanks for help,

Dirk V. Schesmer

SQLServer 2000 should handle the locking for you. When you update a row in the database it will lock that row until you commit the transaction. To get concurreny working propertly you should implement one of the locking strategies that hibernate provides which will prevent users from overwriting each other's data. The <version> tag is the cleanest implementation.

Thanks for replying, sounds like good news!
Do you mean I even do NOT need my lock column, but SQL Server 2000 will take car of locking. You know, SQL Server does not support things like "select for update" as Oracle does.

Dirk

If you stay within one transaction, your database should take care of isolationg the transactions. Make sure you have the proper transaction isolation mode set (google for it if you don't know what it means :) )

uhh????? select * from xxx (UPDLOCK)