Many thanks VC!
Works a treat now.
"VC" <boston103_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<ltRJc.69399$WX.35336_at_attbi_s51>...
> Well, now that we know you are using bitmaps, the answer is sort of
> obvious -- you are dead-locking on concurrent bitmap indexes updates since
> the latter are not a good tool if concurrent DMLs take place:
>
> Session1 updates/deletes key1. It'll lock the key1 entry in the bitmap
> index.
> Session 2 updates/deletes key2. It'll lock the key2 entry in the bitmap
> index.
> Session 1 tries to update/deletes key2 and will block on Session 2.
> Session 2 tries to update/delete key1 and will block on Session 1.
>
> * deadlock *
>
>
> VC
>
Received on Tue Jul 20 2004 - 05:31:00 CDT
