Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
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.
Simple question?
Why is READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT not on by default?
I’m guessing either backwards compatibility, performance, or both?
[Edit] Note that I’m interested in the effect relating to the READ_COMMITTED isolation level, and not the snapshot isolation level.
Why would this be a breaking-change, as it holds less locks, and still doesn’t read non-committed rows?
Both. Mostly compatibility.
Turning snapshot on by default would break the vast majority of applications that expect the old, blocking, behavior. Snapshot makes heavy use of tempdb for the version store and its impact on performance is quite measurable.