What are the usual objections raised by DBAs when developers request the DBA to allow SNAPSHOT isolation level in a SQL Server 2008 database? Read Committed SNAPSHOT is not being requested but simply isolation level of SNAPSH
Share
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.
What are the usual objections raised by DBAs when developers request the DBA to allow SNAPSHOT isolation level in a SQL Server 2008 database? Read Committed SNAPSHOT is not being requested but simply isolation level of SNAPSH
I wouldn’t say there usually are objections. As a DBA, I actively encourage development teams to let me use the Read_Committed_Snapshot isolation level. In fact, I prefer it. As it says in the comments, I will see an increase in the use of tempdb because of it, but the reduction in blocking is well worth the cost.
I’m not as crazy about the use of SNAPSHOT because, usually, I can’t sell developers on the idea that they need to change their code, which they do. Also, because it’s completely dependent on the developers to correctly code it’s use, I see more errors, places where it won’t work or where it creates problems. That’s why I’d rather just enable the isolation level at the database.
I’m sure this is fixed now, but several years ago a project I was working on had problems using SNAPSHOT with nHibernate. I don’t remember any of the details, just that they hit issues, but it was quite a while back.