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: cursor: pin S wait on X

Re: cursor: pin S wait on X

From: Sanjay Mishra <smishra_97_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20061006173057.68775.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com>


I have found that there lots of objects belongs to SYSTEM are invalid   and they are MAterialized view. I also have application view which become invalid at each refresh while it is not the case on QA server but only on the Prod server. Is there any setting that are responsible that Materialized view are not working. I am running a job every 5 minute that is atleast compiling the Application MV but SYSTEM are still invalid. If I run utlrp , all become VALID and after next refresh become INVALID    

  As Jonathan pointed that Compilation/Invalidation can cause it and so is this the case here            

  TIA
  Sanjay

Sanjay Mishra <smishra_97_at_yahoo.com> wrote:

    Thanks Jonathan,Deepak, charles    

  I will also work on it with Support and currently will see if FALSE will work with it    

  Thanks
  Sanjay

Deepak Sharma <sharmakdeep_oracle_at_yahoo.com> wrote:   We have 2 SRs currently open for this same issue, and ever since we set the param to FALSE, we haven't seen the issue repeat (so, yes it's mutex related). We saw a case where 1 session blocks another, we have also seen this happening with parallel process, where parent and child get locked on each other.

5737552.993 - SESSION WAITING VERY LONG ON 'LATCH: LIBRARY CACHE'
5703409.993 - SESSION HANGS DUE TO WAITS ASSOCIATED WITH ENQ: PS - CONTENTION HTH,
Deepak

> 10.2 turns on mutexes by default. The short-term
> workaround is to turn off
> mutexes (_kks_use_mutex_pin = FALSE). There are
> several related bugs,
> notably:
> 5184776 10.2.0.2.0 RDBMS 10.2.0.2.0 PRODID-5
> PORTID-23
> Abstract: HIGH 'CURSOR: PIN S WAIT ON X'
>
> We had one database that blocked on some dictionary
> objects, prohibiting all
> logins (even as sysdba). Unfortunately, since we
> were not able to reproduce,
> we had to close the case as Oracle wanted a
> hanganalyze. If you can get more
> information from various mutex related views, I
> strongly advise you open a
> case with Oracle.
>



Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com     

  Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.                                  

Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Fri Oct 06 2006 - 12:30:57 CDT

Original text of this message

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