Re: Having Deadlock Problem

Hi Jonathan,

Thanks for your reply it was very helpful. You are right , COM+ components intiate distributed transactions using XA interface provided by ORACLE. I have been analyzing this problem for a while now and had felt that this was a deadlock problem. What surprised me also was that there is no closed loop here .
What happens is that the first transaction (session 13) gets stuck and holds the lock for indefinite period.

The log file was generated by Oracle and the ORA 0249 error might not be the reason for this error.

What I'm trying to figure out is why does the first transaction get stuck? Is there anyway I could locate this? or maybe atleast shortlist the possible causes why the first transaction getting stuck.

Thanks in advance

Andy

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<ca2eli$a7o$1_at_sparta.btinternet.com>...
> Note in-line:
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Jonathan Lewis
>
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
>
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
> The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
>
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
> Optimising Oracle Seminar - schedule updated May 1st
>
>
> <ctcgag_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:20040607133244.056$iW_at_newsreader.com...
> > "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > From the holds-waits list in the trace file, it looks like
> > there there is one extra transaction in the mix, but that there
> > isn't a closed loop. I.e, session 13 is blocking 20, and 20 is
> > blocking 43, but there is no indication that 43 is blocking 13.
> >
> > Am I misinterpreting something here?
>
> No - you're right. I didn't look closely enough at
> the graph. It's possible that the absence of a
> closed loop corroborates the distributed nature of
> problem. I'll have to play around with a few examples
> when I have some time.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Xho
> >
Received on Tue Jun 08 2004 - 07:00:05 CDT