Does Linq2sql Automatically Put Executecommand In A Transaction
Solution 1:
Every SQL statement, whether or not wrapped in an explicit transaction, occurs transactionally. So, explicit transaction or not, individual statements are always atomic -- they either happen entirely or not at all. In the example above, either all rows that match the criterion are deleted or none of them are -- this is irrespective of what client code does. There is literally no way to get SQL Server to delete the rows partially; even yanking out the power cord will simply mean whatever was already done for the delete will be undone when the server restarts and reads the transaction log.
The only fly in the ointment is that which rows match can vary depending on how the statement locks. The statement logically happens in two phases, the first to determine which rows will be deleted and the second to actually delete them (while under an update lock). If you, say, issued this statement, and while it was running issued an INSERT
that inserted a row matching the DELETE
criterion, whether the row is in the database or not after the DELETE
has finished depends on which transaction isolation level was in effect for the statements. So if you want practical guarantees about "all rows" being deleted, what client code does comes into scope. This goes a little beyond the scope of the original question, though.
Post a Comment for "Does Linq2sql Automatically Put Executecommand In A Transaction"