Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Snapshot row cache enqueue lock - Reviving 2001 Oracle-l post.

RE: Snapshot row cache enqueue lock - Reviving 2001 Oracle-l post.

From: Hameed, Amir <>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:44:30 -0500
Message-ID: <>

We recently ran into a similar issue with 64-bit/Solaris9 where while creating an MV, the system got hung with error "WAITED TOO LONG FOR A ROW CACHE ENQUEUE LOCK!.." Oracle has identified it as a bug (bug# 3314850) and asked to apply patch to fix it. We are currently trying to reproduce this issue in our night copy of production.

-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Tim Hopkins Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 12:42 PM To:; Subject: Snapshot row cache enqueue lock - Reviving 2001 Oracle-l post.

Hi all,

        We still have a few production systems here on and have been experiencing MV-refresh related deadlocks intermittently for some time.
I've just been asked to have a look at it and came across this oracle-l post from 2001 which sounds like the exact situation. The systemstate dump seems to agree with the first statement from Steve's post.

        The operation DBAs assure me that, whilst it is no longer set, the system was run with event 32333 (null refresh disable) set and the problems still occurred so that once again brings me back to the first statement.

        Hoping Steve with respond here: Did Oracle ever agree to log a bug and investigate?

        If so, was it the unpublished Bug 2664217 - "Undetected deadlock (dc_objects V library cache lock) invalidating dependencies" by any chance?

        Has anyone successfully applied patch to avoid this problem?


RE: ERROR: WAITED TOO LONG FOR A ROW CACHE ENQUEUE LOCK! pid=30 From: Steve Adams <> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 21:28:31 -0800
Message-ID: <>

Hi Glenn,

I got one of these last night.

The snapshot refresh process had an exclusive lock on the row cache enqueue for the snapshot and was waiting for a shared library cache lock on the base table. This is the WRONG locking order. Oracle is supposed to always take library cache locks before row cache enqueue locks. I am attempting to get Support to open a bug on it at the moment.

The other part of the problem is the null-refresh optimization introduced for 8i. The first DML on a snapshot master after a snapshot refresh actually changes the metadata for the base table to record the SCN of the DML operation in TAB$.SPARE3. Snapshot refresh operations record their SCN in SUM$.LASTREFRESHSCN. When a refresh is due, if the last refresh SCN is still higher than the SCN in TAB$, then no work is needed. However, maintaining these SCNs means reading and updating the metadata for DML operations, and that means taking X locks in the library cache and the dictionary cache, in that order. The X lock in the library cache has caused lot of problems, of which this is but another.

Oracle have "fixed" the null-refresh optimization in 9i by calling the dictionary cache primitives directly, so that the X lock in the library cache will not be needed any more. However, I suspect that the locking order for the snapshot refresh is a bug too. Let's see what Oracle say ...

@   Regards,
@   Steve Adams

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Tuesday, 13 February 2001 2:16
To: Oracledba_at_Lazydba. Com;

The system was not too busy. Processes running were materialized view refreshes (stored procs doing rollups, joins, etc...). The system was then locked up. Some queries could be run, others couldn't. Refreshes never completed. I had to alter system kill to release the hang.

Here are the errors:

>From the alert file;



Received on Thu Nov 02 2006 - 13:44:30 CST

Original text of this message