Re: Row Locks?

"Sybrand Bakker" <postbus_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> is rumoured to have said:

>
>"Sunday Driver" <jane_austen_at_geocities.com> wrote in message
>news:3b1ced7e.63066474_at_client.ne.news.psi.net...
>> Hi
>>
>> If 2 users try to update the same row at the same time, the one that
>> gets there first gets to save and the other gets an error about the
>> row having been modified by another user, right?
>>
>> My (other) question is:
>> Has anyone ever heard of Oracle leaving some kind of permanent lock on
>> the row so that all users after that get the error msg about the row
>> having been modified by another user?
>>
>> If not, why would all future users get the error when they try to
>> modify these rows?
>>
>> TIA
>> Bryn
>>
>> "In such cases as these,
>> a good memory is unpardonable."
>
>If a row is locked others will get the error message above.
>The lock will remain until the first user commits
>And before you start asking: there is no such thing as a timeout, so if the
>first user goes out to lunch, the lock will remain virtually forever.
>
>Hth,
>
>
>Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA
>
>The usual adminitions to read the manual apply
>
>
>
>

Thanks, I appreciate the info. This lock has (according to my user) been in place for months, we're going to hunt for a computer under the stairs. :-)

What would happen if the first user didn't ever commit the changes but rather crashed out somehow, leaving the row uncommitted yet changed? Is this even possible? Would that result in the error presenting to all users after that?

Thanks again for your help.
Bryn

"In such cases as these,

       a good memory is unpardonable." Received on Tue Jun 05 2001 - 15:13:22 CDT