Re: table locking question

I haven't tested it, but I believe that when a process discovers a row locked by a dead transaction, it will perform a local rollback in order to continue processing.

In the meantime, pmon will have been
rolling back the entire transaction - but since one step of rolling back entails
marking the UNDO record as 'undo applied', when pmon finally gets to the record that has already been applied, it can skip over it and go to the next one in the chain
of UNDO.

--
Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

Coming soon a new one-day tutorial:
Cost Based Optimisation
(see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html )

____UK_______March 19th
____USA_(FL)_May 2nd


Next Seminar dates:
(see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html )

____USA_(CA, TX)_August


The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html


ctcgag_at_hotmail.com wrote in message
<20030203190729.048$bf_at_newsreader.com>...


>

>This suggests to me that if a process encounters a row locked by a

>transaction being rolled back by pmon, that it will just sit and wait

>while pmon slogs through 10,000 blocks that no one cares about

>to get to this one.  Is that the way it works?  Or can the server

process


>take the bull by the horns, so to speak, and clean out the offending

>block for itself.

>