Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: redologs and deadlock interaction
carab1n3r wrote:
> I'm still relatively green as a DBA, so excuse the possibly simple
> question...
>
> We have a DB that is seeing a lot of deadlocks, occasionally hundreds
> at a time. Yes, typically this is an external-application/development
> problem.
>
> However, I'm trying to determine and/or explain what impact lots-o-
> deadlocks has on redolog, particularly the switching. The reason I
> mention it is that during these "deadlock storms", we occasionally run
> out of redologs to switch to.
>
> The drumbeat I'm hearing is to "just add more redolog groups!!!" since
> that's easy to do, but we're only running into this redolog-switching
> problem during the deadlock storms, and my gut is that this is just a
> bandaid and will eventually not resolve the problem as deadlock rates
> continue to increase.
>
> So can someone explain to me (in such a way that I can explain it to
> others), when we have lots of deadlocks, what impact does that have on
> redologs?
>
>
> Thanks a lot in advance for the advice.
>
It is most likely that it is the high rate of DML activity (as seen by many log switches) that are contributing to the deadlocks. The high rate of log switches is a symptom but not a cause of your deadlocks. Log switches and redo logs do not contribute to deadlocks. If your system did not experience the high rate of DML then your chances of a deadlock would decrease.
As you said, this is an application issue. Chasing after the high rate of redo log switching is a red herring in solving your issue.
HTH,
Brian
-- =================================================================== Brian Peasland dba_at_nospam.peasland.net http://www.peasland.net Remove the "nospam." from the email address to email me. "I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of the three" - Unknown -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.comReceived on Tue Sep 11 2007 - 21:31:49 CDT
![]() |
![]() |