Review fixes

src/Umbraco.Core/Persistence/SqlSyntax/SqlServerSyntaxProvider.cs

@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ where tbl.[name]=@0 and col.[name]=@1;", tableName, columnName)
             // soon as we get Database, a transaction is started
 
             if (db.Transaction.IsolationLevel < IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted)
-                throw new InvalidOperationException("A transaction with minimum RepeatableRead isolation level is required.");
+                throw new InvalidOperationException("A transaction with minimum ReadCommitted isolation level is required.");
 
 
             // *not* using a unique 'WHERE IN' query here because the *order* of lockIds is important to avoid deadlocks
@@ -269,14 +269,14 @@ where tbl.[name]=@0 and col.[name]=@1;", tableName, columnName)
             // soon as we get Database, a transaction is started
 
             if (db.Transaction.IsolationLevel < IsolationLevel.ReadCommitted)
-                throw new InvalidOperationException("A transaction with minimum RepeatableRead isolation level is required.");
+                throw new InvalidOperationException("A transaction with minimum ReadCommitted isolation level is required.");
 
             // *not* using a unique 'WHERE IN' query here because the *order* of lockIds is important to avoid deadlocks
             foreach (var lockId in lockIds)
             {
                 var i = db.ExecuteScalar<int?>("SELECT value FROM umbracoLock WITH (REPEATABLEREAD) WHERE id=@id", new { id = lockId });
                 if (i == null) // ensure we are actually locking!
-                    throw new Exception($"LockObject with id={lockId} does not exist.");
+                    throw new ArgumentException($"LockObject with id={lockId} does not exist.", nameof(lockIds));
             }
         }
         public override bool DoesTableExist(IDatabase db, string tableName)