Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 594473
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T15:57:26+00:00 2026-05-13T15:57:26+00:00

I get a problem with SQL Server 2005, where a stored procedure seems to

  • 0

I get a problem with SQL Server 2005, where a stored procedure seems to randomly hang/lock, and never return any result.

What the stored procedure does is to call a function, which in turn makes a union of two different functions – returning the same type of data, but from different criteria. Nothing advanced. I don’t think it’s the functions hanging, because there are other SPROCs that call the same functions without a problem, even when the first one has locked up.

After the SPROC hangs, any further attempts to call it will result in a time out – not in the call itself, but the response time will be too great, as no result is returned the code will throw an exception.

It has happened at least three times in two months in a relatively low-load system. Restarting SQL Server solves the situation, but I don’t regard that as a “solution” to the problem.

I’ve looked for information, and found something about the query cache going corrupt. However, that was in regard to dynamic SQL strings, which my problem is not. I guess it could still be the query cache.

Has anyone had the same problem, and if so, what did you do about it (don’t say “restart SQL Server every morning” 😉 )? Is there any way of debugging the issue to try and find exactly what and where things go wrong? I can’t recreate the problem, but when it appears again it would be good if I knew where to take a closer look.

I don’t think it makes any difference, but just for the record, the SPROC is called from .NET 3.5 code, using the Entity Franework. I say it doesn’t make a difference, because when I’ve tested to just execute the SPROC directly from SQL Server Management Studio, no result is returned either.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T15:57:27+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 3:57 pm

    It’s most likely parameter sniffing

    Restarting SQL server clears the plan cache. If you rebuild statistics or indexes the problem will also go away “ALTER INDEX” and “sp_updatestats”

    I suggest using “parameter masking” (not WITH RECOMPILE!) to get around it

    SO answer already by me:

    • One
    • Two
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 357k
  • Answers 357k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer The other answers are correct. Here is some code you… May 14, 2026 at 9:40 am
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer you ruin the noConflict concept by reassigning the jquery to… May 14, 2026 at 9:40 am
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer If you get that particular error, you don't actually have… May 14, 2026 at 9:40 am

Related Questions

Recently, I've started having a problem with my SQL Server 2005 client running on
I'm following this walkthrough: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/879kf95c(VS.80).aspx In a machine running vista ultimate, I have installed:
i have tested the difference between defining varchar(max) in opposite text with our legacy
I'm having problems coming up with an adequate restraint in SQL Server 2005. My
We have a large application mainly written in SQL Server 7.0, where all database

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.