Lynn Pettis (5/27/2016)

---

Mad-Dog (5/27/2016)

---

Lynn Pettis (5/27/2016)

---

Mad-Dog (5/27/2016)

---

GilaMonster (5/27/2016)

---

You really wouldn't want no locks at all. Rows deleted while they're still being inserted, updates affecting some of the rows they should because the rest are still being inserted, etc, etc, etc.

For your shared 'temp' table, that's often a bad idea for exactly the reasons you're seeing. May I suggest you look at redesigning it so that the users use temp tables, or give every user their own schema with their own table that they can insert, update, delete at their leisure.

Alternately look at how the table is indexed and make sure that SQL isn't having to scan the entire table to find User7's rows.

the problem is that we cannot do any thing here this is how the program work and we can't interact with the queried to put no lock etc.. it's closed program!

I am curious about what kind of program this is.

the program called Priority

Who sells it? Just doing a Google search doesn't come up with anything in the first page that even looks like an application program.