Are temporary tables thread-safe?

18,331

Solution 1

For the first case, no, it is not possible, because #temp is a local temporary table, and therefore not visible to other connections (it's assumed that your users are using separate database connections). The temp table name is aliased to a random name that is generated and you reference that when you reference your local temp table.

In your case, since you are creating a local temp table in a stored procedure, that temp table will be dropped when the scope of the procedure is exited (see the "remarks section").

A local temporary table created in a stored procedure is dropped automatically when the stored procedure completes. The table can be referenced by any nested stored procedures executed by the stored procedure that created the table. The table cannot be referenced by the process which called the stored procedure that created the table.

For the second case, yes, you will get this error, because the table already exists, and the table lasts for as long as the connection does. If this is the case, then I recommend you check for the existence of the table before you try to create it.

Solution 2

Local-scope temp tables (with a single #) are created with an identifier at the end of them that makes them unique; multiple callers (even with the same login) should never overlap.

(Try it: create the same temp table from two connections and same login. Then query tempdb.dbo.sysobjects to see the actual tables created...)

Solution 3

Local temp tables are thread-safe, because they only exist within the current context. Please don't confuse context with current connection (from MSDN: "A local temporary table created in a stored procedure is dropped automatically when the stored procedure is finished"), the same connection can safely call two or more times a stored procedure that creates a local temp table (like #TMP).

You can test this behavior by executing the following stored procedure from two connections. This SP will wait 30 seconds so we can be sure the two threads will be running their over their own versions of the #TMP table at the same time:

CREATE PROCEDURE myProc(@n INT)
AS BEGIN
    RAISERROR('running with (%d)', 0, 1, @n);
    CREATE TABLE #TMP(n INT);
    INSERT #TMP VALUES(@n);
    INSERT #TMP VALUES(@n * 10);
    INSERT #TMP VALUES(@n * 100);
    WAITFOR DELAY '00:00:30';
    SELECT * FROM #TMP;
END;

Solution 4

The short answer is:

Isolation of temporary tables is guaranteed per query, and there's nothing to worry about either in regard to threading, locks, or concurrent access.

I'm not sure why answers here talk about a significance of 'connections' and threads as these are programming concepts, whereas query isolation is handled at the database level.

Local temporary objects are separated by Session in SQL server. If you have two queries running concurrently, then they are two completely separate sessions and won't intefere with one another. The Login doesn't matter, so for example if you are using a single connection string using ADO.NET (meaning that multiple concurrent queries will use the same SQL server 'login'), your queries will all still run in separate sessions. Connection Pooling also doesn't matter. Local temporary objects (Tables and Stored Procedures) are completely safe from being seen by other sessions.

To clarify how this works; while your code has a single, common name for the local temporary objects, SQL Server appends a unique string to each object per each session to keep them separate. You can see this by running the following in SSMS:

CREATE TABLE #T (Col1 INT)

SELECT * FROM tempdb.sys.tables WHERE [name] LIKE N'#T%';

You will see something like the following for the name:

T_______________00000000001F

Then, without closing that query tab, open up a new query tab and paste in that same query and run it again. You should now see something like the following:

T_______________00000000001F

T_______________000000000020

So, each time your code references #T, SQL Server will translate it to the proper name based on the session. The separation is all handled auto-magically.

Solution 5

Temp tables are tied to the session, so if different users run your procedure simultaneously there's no conflict...

Share:
18,331
Juliet
Author by

Juliet

Read the F# Wikibook.

Updated on June 02, 2022

Comments

  • Juliet
    Juliet almost 2 years

    I'm using SQL Server 2000, and many of the stored procedures it use temp tables extensively. The database has a lot of traffic, and I'm concerned about the thread-safety of creating and dropping temp tables.

    Lets say I have a stored procedure which creates a few temp tables, it may even join temp tables to other temp tables, etc. And lets also say that two users execute the stored procedure at the same time.

    • Is it possible for one user to run the sp and which creates a temp table called #temp, and the another user runs the same sp but gets stopped because a table called #temp already exists in the database?

    • How about if the same user executes the same stored procedure twice on the same connection?

    • Are there any other weird scenarios that might cause two users queries to interfere with one another?