Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

"Thomas Kyte" <thomas.kyte_at_oracle.com> wrote

> so your recent posting in another newsgroup trying to figure out why a
> simple query in read committed isolation is deadlocking with other
> statements was due to an improperly designed system?

If you are referring to this post http://tinyurl.com/2rtx7 then this is the answer. The customer did not have the index at all. I was preplexed with the deadlock because I thought they had the necessary index. After all we control the schema by which the database was created at the customer site and was running fine for many months. Only when I looked at the schema at the customer site, I found the index missing. Without the index, SQLServer resorted to table lock leading to deadlock. Once the index was created, the problem went away for good, as it was in the past. The customer hasn't still given an answer on how the index disappeared. Now please don't tell me that Oracle customers don't goof up. Recently I read here how Orbitz DBAs deleted some important Oracle configuration files, which lead to that infamous crash in Aug 2003.

> or that you must commit really frequently (like row by row) when doing
> a mass purge to avoid the "long transaction problem" is good design?
> -- another posting of your recently.

This problem was also solved. What is a good design differs from product to product. Oracle must be having its own quirks which other RDBMS may not find it bit odd. I don't understand what u are trying to prove? Received on Thu Apr 01 2004 - 08:42:26 CST