Subject | Re[2]: [ib-support] dead locks no way out - URGENT - Not Fixed |
---|---|
Author | Johannes Pretorius |
Post date | 2002-11-28T13:49:30Z |
But does 4608 not make my transaction invisible to the other applications
or in short I cannot see the other applications data
until I disconnect and connect again.. Like a snapshot idea ??
Thanks
At 11:34 28/11/2002 -0300, you wrote:
or in short I cannot see the other applications data
until I disconnect and connect again.. Like a snapshot idea ??
Thanks
At 11:34 28/11/2002 -0300, you wrote:
>I would suggest using 4608. If you have long data editing periods,
>like filling orders/products, etc... you can try to use cached updates
>to send all the changes at once to the database together with explicit
>transaction control to make the transaction as short as possible.
>
>Also try to use Commit instead of CommitRetaining and Wait on Locks
>FALSE. Wait on Locks TRUE will not give you deadlocks *only* if the other
>transaction who is "locking" the record Rollbacks.
>
>Your log suggests that you have some network problem. IB/FB try to
>detects when a host is no more active from time to time, until it
>detects a disconnection it will keep holding any open transactions
>from that host and this can cause deadlocks on other hosts depending
>on what you have done to the data with that transaction.
>
>[]s
>
> Carlos
> WarmBoot Informatica - http://www.warmboot.com.br
> Interbase-BR - http://www.interbase-br.com
>
>JP> Well how about the 4096 with the setting COMMIT RETAIN will that work
>JP> as we have the following problem
>
>JP> When they update record it hangs every now and again
>JP> there is about 10 people working. Also the deadlocks are becoming
>more and
>JP> more.
>
>JP> In the interbase log file I have a LOT of 10054 Socket Errors Server side
>JP> that says the host went down.
>
>JP> Can this endup in a dead lock for the others ??
>
>JP> Thanks in Advance
>JP> Johannes
>
>
>JP> At 10:52 28/11/2002 -0300, you wrote:
> >>In the jurassic period, when I used BDE, I think my settings was flag
> >>= 4608. It worked OK, considering the obvious BDE limitations.
> >>
> >>[]s
> >>
> >> Carlos
> >> WarmBoot Informatica - http://www.warmboot.com.br
> >> Interbase-BR - http://www.interbase-br.com
> >>
> >>JP> Good day
> >>JP> -\=\=-\=\=-\=
> >>
> >>JP> I have a problem with Interbase 5.6 where I keep on getting deadlocks
> >>with
> >>JP> Delphi 5
> >>JP> I have update the BDE to have the WAIT FOR LOCKS property and made
> it TRUE
> >>JP> also I made the driver flag 4096
> >>JP> But I keep on getting this error after a while
> >>JP> user transaction already in progress
> >>JP> update conflicts with concurrent update
> >>
> >>JP> PLEASE can somebofdy help
> >>
> >>JP> Johannes Pretorius
> >>
> >>JP> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>JP> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >>JP> ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>JP> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >>ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>JP> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>JP> ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>JP> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/