Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Tuning deadlocks

RE: Tuning deadlocks

From: Allen, Brandon <Brandon.Allen_at_OneNeck.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 08:46:56 -0700
Message-ID: <04DDF147ED3A0D42B48A48A18D574C45023615E8@NT15.oneneck.corp>


What do you mean by "cope with"? I believe Oracle's only way of coping with deadlocks is to immediately terminate the transaction that detects the deadlock condition and roll it back, allowing the other transaction to proceed. I don't know why this would be done any quicker in one database than another unless one was just on a CPU-bound server so it was running more slowly in general. Deadlocks are generally a problem with the application configuration - you could look at the trace file created when it occurs to find the objects and SQL statements involved, then fix the application to prevent them from recurring.

-----Original Message-----

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Peter Dixon Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 2:44 AM To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: Tuning deadlocks

I have two live databases running the same application, one of the databases has deadlocks which the database seems to cope with quicker than the same application running on the other database. It version 8.1.7.4 and I have checked the init.ora including hidden parameters like LM_DD_INTERVAL are there any other parameters which might resolve this problem?

--

http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

--

http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l Received on Fri Sep 16 2005 - 10:47:25 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US