>>No, I explained one of common scenarios in an earlier message.
>
>Well, as per statement 1, when a hit locks table A and then table B, that might be the situation I have, assuming someone goes in Monitor for an update. As, as I mentioned earlier, every hit in the application generate updates in the Member table. So, in this case, when table A is concerned, table B would then be concerned as well. Then, we combine that with another hit at the same time which makes use of those two tables in a query.
>
>Is this what you were referring to?

Yes as long as update of both tables happen in the same transaction.