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 1096721
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 17, 20262026-05-17T00:19:22+00:00 2026-05-17T00:19:22+00:00

I’m working on a Flex/BlazeDS/Spring/JPA/Hibernate web application hooked up to a Microsoft SQL Server

  • 0

I’m working on a Flex/BlazeDS/Spring/JPA/Hibernate web application hooked up to a Microsoft SQL Server database. It seems to be locking the tables too aggresively. From my research, it looks like using the snapshot isolation policy is the best bet.

I’ve set things up as such:

  <bean id="entityManagerFactory"
        class="org.springframework.orm.jpa.LocalContainerEntityManagerFactoryBean" lazy-init="true">
    <property name="persistenceUnitName" value="OrderManagerPersistenceUnit" />
    <property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/>
     <property name="jpaVendorAdapter">
        <bean class="org.springframework.orm.jpa.vendor.HibernateJpaVendorAdapter" />
     </property>
    <property name="jpaProperties">
      <props>
        <prop key="hibernate.jdbc.batch_size">${db.main.hibernate.jdbc.batch_size}</prop>
        <prop key="hibernate.hbm2ddl.auto">${db.main.hbm2ddl.auto}</prop>
        <prop key="hibernate.search.default.indexBase">${db.main.search.default.indexBase}</prop>
        <prop key="hibernate.search.autoregister_listeners">${db.main.search.autoregister_listeners}</prop>
          <prop key="hibernate.show_sql">${db.main.show_sql}</prop>
          <prop key="hibernate.dialect">${db.main.dialect}</prop>
          <prop key="hibernate.connection.isolation">${db.main.isolation}</prop>
          <prop key="hibernate.ejb.naming_strategy">com.herffjones.zebra.db.ZebraNamingStrategy</prop>
      </props>
    </property>
  </bean>

However, I’m not convinced that it’s actually using hibernate.connection.isolation. It looks like I have to set some properties on the JDBC datasource as well.

I’d like to verify whether or not it’s currently using 4096 as the transaction isolation level for queries.

What packages and log levels can I add to my logback.xml file to clearly see the isolation level that a particular query is using?

Thanks!

  • 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
    2026-05-17T00:19:23+00:00Added an answer on May 17, 2026 at 12:19 am

    You should set the transaction isolation level of hibernate as 2 (the java.sql.Connection constant for READ_COMMITTED.

    Then execute the following in your SQL Server 2005 instance (with no active connections):

    ALTER DATABASE [database_name] SET ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION ON;
    ALTER DATABASE [database_name] SET READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT ON;

    Test by executing this query:

    SELECT [name], snapshot_isolation_state_desc, snapshot_isolation_state, is_read_committed_snapshot_on
    FROM sys.databases
    WHERE [name] = ‘database_name’;

    Now a READ_COMMITTED will be interpreted as READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT in SQL Server.

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

Sidebar

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.