Bug in Oracle's handling of transaction isolation levels?

Hello,
I think there is a bug in Oracle 9i database related to serializable transaction isolation level.
Here is the information about the server:
Operating System:     Microsoft Windows 2000 Server Version 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 Build 2195
System type:          Single CPU x86 Family 6 Model 8 Stepping 10 GenuineIntel ~866 MHz
BIOS-Version:          Award Medallion BIOS v6.0
Locale:               German
Here is my information about the client computer:
Operaing system:     Microsoft Windows XP
System type:          IBM ThinkPad
Language for DB access: Java
Database information:
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.1.0 - Production
With the Partitioning, OLAP and Oracle Data Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.1.0 - Production
The database has been set up using the default settings and nothing has been changed.
To reproduce the bug, follow these steps:
1. Create a user in 9i database called 'kaon' with password 'kaon'
2. Using SQL Worksheet create the following table:
CREATE TABLE OIModel (
modelID int NOT NULL,
logicalURI varchar (255) NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT pk_OIModel PRIMARY KEY (modelID),
CONSTRAINT logicalURI_OIModel UNIQUE (logicalURI)
3. Run the following program:
package test;
import java.sql.*;
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
java.util.Locale.setDefault(java.util.Locale.US);
Class.forName("oracle.jdbc.OracleDriver");
Connection connection=DriverManager.getConnection("jdbc:oracle:thin:@schlange:1521:ORCL","kaon","kaon");
DatabaseMetaData dmd=connection.getMetaData();
System.out.println("Product version:");
System.out.println(dmd.getDatabaseProductVersion());
System.out.println();
connection.setAutoCommit(false);
connection.setTransactionIsolation(Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE);
int batches=0;
int counter=2000;
for (int outer=0;outer<50;outer++) {
for (int i=0;i<200;i++) {
executeUpdate(connection,"INSERT INTO OIModel (modelID,logicalURI) VALUES ("+counter+",'start"+counter+"')");
executeUpdate(connection,"UPDATE OIModel SET logicalURI='next"+counter+"' WHERE modelID="+counter);
counter++;
connection.commit();
System.out.println("Batch "+batches+" done");
batches++;
protected static void executeUpdate(Connection conn,String sql) throws Exception {
Statement s=conn.createStatement();
try {
int result=s.executeUpdate(sql);
if (result!=1)
throw new Exception("Should update one row, but updated "+result+" rows, query is "+sql);
finally {
s.close();
The program prints the following output:
Product version:
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.1.0 - Production
With the Partitioning, OLAP and Oracle Data Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.1.0 - Production
Batch 0 done
Batch 1 done
java.lang.Exception: Should update one row, but updated 0 rows, query is UPDATE OIModel SET logicalURI='next2571' WHERE modelID=2571
     at test.Test.executeUpdate(Test.java:35)
     at test.Test.main(Test.java:22)
That is, after several iterations, the executeUpdate() method returns 0, rather than 1. This is clearly an error.
4. Leave the database as is. Replace the line
int counter=2000;
with line
int counter=4000;
and restart the program. The following output is generated:
Product version:
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.1.0 - Production
With the Partitioning, OLAP and Oracle Data Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.1.0 - Production
Batch 0 done
Batch 1 done
java.sql.SQLException: ORA-08177: can't serialize access for this transaction
     at oracle.jdbc.dbaccess.DBError.throwSqlException(DBError.java:134)
     at oracle.jdbc.ttc7.TTIoer.processError(TTIoer.java:289)
     at oracle.jdbc.ttc7.Oall7.receive(Oall7.java:573)
     at oracle.jdbc.ttc7.TTC7Protocol.doOall7(TTC7Protocol.java:1891)
     at oracle.jdbc.ttc7.TTC7Protocol.parseExecuteFetch(TTC7Protocol.java:1093)
     at oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleStatement.executeNonQuery(OracleStatement.java:2047)
     at oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleStatement.doExecuteOther(OracleStatement.java:1940)
     at oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleStatement.doExecuteWithTimeout(OracleStatement.java:2709)
     at oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleStatement.executeUpdate(OracleStatement.java:796)
     at test.Test.executeUpdate(Test.java:33)
     at test.Test.main(Test.java:22)
This is clearly an error - only one transaction is being active at the time, so there is no need for serialization of transactions.
5. You can restart the program as many times you wish (by chaging the initial counter value first). The same error (can't serialize access for this transaction) will be generated.
6. The error doesn't occur if the transaction isolation level isn't changed.
7. The error doesn't occur if the UPDATE statement is commented out.
Sincerely yours
     Boris Motik

I have a similar problem
I'm using Oracle and serializable isolation level.
Transaction inserts 4000 objects and then updates about 1000 of these objects.
Transactions sees inserted objects but cant update them (row not found or can't serialize access for this transaction are thrown).
On 3 tries for this transaction 1 succeds and 2 fails with one of above errors.
No other transactions run concurently.
In read commited isolation error doesn't arise.
I'm using plain JDBC.
Similar or even much bigger serializable transaction works perfectly on the same database as plsql procedure.
I've tried oci and thin (Oracle) drivers and oranxo demo (i-net) driver.
And this problems arises on all of this drivers.
This problem confused me so much :(.
Maby one of Oracle users, developers nows cause of this strange behaviour.
Thanx for all answers.

Similar Messages

  • Serializable transaction isolation level bugs

    Hello!
    I would like to know which versions of Oracle database are free or not free of serializable transaction isolation level bugs.
    Especially I'm interested in all informations about 440317 bug which is described here: Bug in Oracle's handling of transaction isolation levels?
    Thank you very much.

    If you are genuinely suffering from 440317 (and not poor design which is the most common cause of ORA-8177, and hence why it's taken so long for this bug to get fixed - originally raised in 7.2.2 !!!) then you will have to wait until 10g R2 sees the light of day.
    Cheers, APC

  • Setting transaction isolation level for jDriver Oracle/XA

    edocs (http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs70/oracle/trxjdbcx.html#1080746) states that,
    if using jDriver for Oracle/XA you can not set the transaction isolation level
    for a
    transaction and that 'Transactions use the transaction isolation level set on
    the connection
    or the default transaction isolation level for the database'. Does this mean that
    you shouldn't try to set it programatically (fair enough) or that you can't set
    it in the weblogic deployment descriptor either? Also anybody got any idea what
    the default is likely to be if you are using
    an Oracle 9iR2 database?

    Ian,
    The default for Oracle (any version) is ReadCommitted. The only other
    isolation level Oracle supports is Serializable but it's implemented in
    such a way that you will be allowed to continue until commit time and
    only then you might get an exception stating the the access for that
    transaction could not be serialized.
    I don't know for the jDriver but if you use the Oracle Thin XA driver
    even if you set the isolation level in your descriptor you will get an
    exception from Weblogic. It is a Weblogic bug and you can contact
    [email protected] to get a patch.
    Regards,
    Dejan
    IJ wrote:
    edocs (http://e-docs.bea.com/wls/docs70/oracle/trxjdbcx.html#1080746) states that,
    if using jDriver for Oracle/XA you can not set the transaction isolation level
    for a
    transaction and that 'Transactions use the transaction isolation level set on
    the connection
    or the default transaction isolation level for the database'. Does this mean that
    you shouldn't try to set it programatically (fair enough) or that you can't set
    it in the weblogic deployment descriptor either? Also anybody got any idea what
    the default is likely to be if you are using
    an Oracle 9iR2 database?

  • About Transaction Isolation Levels...

    Hi Everyone,
    Please, i have a couple of questions regarding the Transaction Isolation Level, i will really appreciate any help on this...
    1.- It is possible to know the transaction isolation level of all connections to the DB.??.. something like a select from v$session...
    2.- I have an application that manage it's own connection pool and have set all of its connections to Transaction_read_commited. The problem is that for some reason, sometimes we get the "ORA-08177: can't serialize access for this transaction." Error. But what i know is that this ORA-08177 error only happens if the transaction isolation level is set to TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE. How can be that possible??. There is another application running that points to the same database that maybe uses TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE connections but even if this is happening, why the error is happening with my application!!?. Both applications are running on the same weblogic application server with oracle thin jdbc driver... (Oracle 9i)
    Thanks in advance...
    Victor.

    thanks for the answers guys... i was reding several articles by Tom and also looking into Metalink documents... but my concern or my million dollar question is still: if exists the possibility to get the ORA-8177 error, even if i'm using Transaction isolation level READ_COMMITED???... what i learned from this articles is that if i use the Transaction SERIALIZABLE i may have this ORA-8177.. otherwise i wouldn't. right?... and if exists bugs related all that bugs may exists only if i define my connection as TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE.
    I'm pretty sure that in my application ("Application A") i'm not using any TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE connections.... but i'm afraid that the other application ("Application B") is causing some blocks or conflicts with "Application A"... Is that possible?? (i think that in theory it's not)... But still if that's possible.. i return to my question... Why that ORA-8177 error raises on my "Application A".... this kind of error must be raising only in the "application B"....
    Well maybe is something confusing.. an maybe is totally related to some developing mistake.... i just wanted to confirm some other point of views....
    thanks again!!..
    Victor

  • Setting transaction isolation levels in WAS5

    I think I'm missing something pretty easy. How can I set the isolation
    levels for the containter managed transactions on my beans?
    Specifically, I want to set soem lookup methods on my Sessions beans
    to TRANSACTION_REPEATABLE_READ. I've already put the
    container-transaction blocks in my ejb-jar.xml
    Does Websphere 5 have something akin to WebLogic's
    weblogic-ejb-jar.xml where you can set additional parameters like
    this? Do I have to use a tool like WSAD to specify this? The AAT
    doesn't seem to have this option.
    Thanks,
    James Lynn

    Hi Slava, Ryan,
    We haven't looked at 8.1 yet since our release cycle wouldn't allow us
    to move to 8.1 until at least June anyway, but even if the problems was
    fixed there it took BEA support more than 6 months (I opened the case on
    Sep 23 2002 and only this week I got the patch that I haven't even tried
    to test to see if it works) to issue a patch for such a small problem.
    The server would just check if the Oracle XA driver was being used and
    no matter what version would just throw an exception if you try to set
    the transaction isolation level saying that the feature in the Oracle
    8.1.7 driver was broken... (although you might be using 9.x or even a
    pre-8.1.7 driver)...
    So this is about it.
    And Slava, I've tried pushing a case harder only to end up with BEA
    support trying to convince me that I was misinterpreting the JDBC spec
    when it was not true, so I just gave up. The main goal of BEA support in
    all of our experience has been that they don't try to solve the cases
    but close them.
    That's my and some of my colleagues personal views anyway, you don't
    have to share them.
    Regards,
    Dejan
    Slava Imeshev wrote:
    Hi Deyan,
    Sorry for the delay. Could you give us more details about CR090104?
    I've got some feedback in XA area, not sure if it was a related case.
    Also, I've never had any problems with weblogic CCE, so you may want
    to push your case a little harder.
    As per the bold statement - the initial question was about functionality
    available in weblogic but not available in websphere - it can't be more
    bold :)
    Regards,
    Slava Imeshev
    "Deyan D. Bektchiev" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    This is a very bold statement Slava, considering that with Oracle XA
    driver you cannot even set the transaction isolation level because of a
    Weblogic bug (CR090104 that has been open for more than 6 months
    already)...
    Dejan
    Slava Imeshev wrote:
    Hi James,
    "James F'jord Lynn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    I think I'm missing something pretty easy. How can I set the isolation
    levels for the containter managed transactions on my beans?
    Specifically, I want to set soem lookup methods on my Sessions beans
    to TRANSACTION_REPEATABLE_READ. I've already put the
    container-transaction blocks in my ejb-jar.xml
    Does Websphere 5 have something akin to WebLogic's
    weblogic-ejb-jar.xml where you can set additional parameters like
    this? Do I have to use a tool like WSAD to specify this? The AAT
    doesn't seem to have this option.
    My guess here is that it's a signal that this is a last chance
    for you to abandon WebSphere and return back to WebLogic's
    safe harbor.
    Regards,
    Slava Imeshev

  • Locking issues with transaction-isolation levels

              I believe that my program is suffering from some sort of deadlock, and I was hoping
              for some feedback.
              I am helping to develop a trading system
              using EJBs, Oracle 9i, and Bea Weblogic 7.0. The system provides an entity EJB
              called LiveOrder that exposes several finder methods, most of which return java.util.Collections
              of LiveOrder EJBs.
              In weblogic-ejb-jar.xml, I have set the transaction isolation-levels for these
              finders to TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED_FOR_UPDATE (b/c TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE
              isn't really supported by Oracle), in an effort to eliminate phantom reads, which
              occur frequently if I do not use this isolation level. These finders all use transaction
              attribute 'Required'.
              It is my understanding that any transaction that calls any of these finders either
              will lock the database if no other transaction already owns the lock, or will
              wait until the lock is released if another transaction owns that lock. It also
              is my understanding that a transaction that owns a lock will always release any
              locks acquired upon expiration of that transaction (whether that be via commit
              or via rollback).
              However, this doesn't always appear the case: I have noticed occassionally that
              several clients "hang," as they wait for the lock that, for some reason, is not
              being released by its transaction. There do not appear to be any exceptions thrown
              by the system prior to the system hanging, and the Weblogic administration tool
              states that all transactions have been committed.
              If it helps, I have included the general algorithm for the main (i.e., most expensive)
              transaction:
              1. a client calls a stateless session EJB's processOrder method (which should
              implicitly start a new transaction, b/c this method has attibute 'RequiresNew')
              2. the transaction invokes the LiveOrder finder method (this should lock the DB,
              so subsequent callers should block until the lock is released).
              3. the transaction invokes another LiveOrder finder method, returning a separate
              set of data.
              4. the transaction invokes a finder method from a separate entity EJB (called
              Security), which maps to a "read-only" table in the DB (default transaction-isolation
              level, Required attribute).
              5. the transaction invokes a finder method from yet another separate entity EJB
              (called SecurityMarketValues), which maps to some other table (not read-only)
              in the DB (again, default transaction-isolation level, Required attribute).
              6. the transaction writes to the SecurityMarketValues entity EJB.
              7. the transaction writes to the LiveOrders retrieved from steps 2 and 3.
              8. the transaction ends by exiting method processOrder (thus releasing the locks
              on the LiveOrder table in the DB).
              In the system, there also exist other transactions that occassionally call the
              LiveOrder EJB finder methods, but only briefly to take a "snapshot" of the live
              order table (i.e., these transactions do not make calls to other DB tables, and
              close transactions almost immediately after starting them)
              Like I mentioned before, the system sometimes works, and sometimes it hangs. Any
              ideas? I'm running out...
              

    Jon,
              If there was an Oracle deadlock the DB would resolve it momentarily and
              will ultimately choose one transaction and throw an exception so it's
              not a DB deadlock.
              Take a thread dump at the very moment your system seems to be hanging
              and look at what the threads are doing.
              From your description it's not very unlikely that those threads of
              yours that take snapshots of the data will not disrupt the transactions
              so you may be surprised by the thread dumps that this is actually what
              happens -- those snapshot thread wait for some lock while holding locks
              needed by you other threads and it just slows down the system.
              Regards,
              Dejan
              Jon Gadzik wrote:
              >I believe that my program is suffering from some sort of deadlock, and I was hoping
              >for some feedback.
              >
              >I am helping to develop a trading system
              >using EJBs, Oracle 9i, and Bea Weblogic 7.0. The system provides an entity EJB
              >called LiveOrder that exposes several finder methods, most of which return java.util.Collections
              >of LiveOrder EJBs.
              >
              >In weblogic-ejb-jar.xml, I have set the transaction isolation-levels for these
              >finders to TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED_FOR_UPDATE (b/c TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE
              >isn't really supported by Oracle), in an effort to eliminate phantom reads, which
              >occur frequently if I do not use this isolation level. These finders all use transaction
              >attribute 'Required'.
              >
              >It is my understanding that any transaction that calls any of these finders either
              >will lock the database if no other transaction already owns the lock, or will
              >wait until the lock is released if another transaction owns that lock. It also
              >is my understanding that a transaction that owns a lock will always release any
              >locks acquired upon expiration of that transaction (whether that be via commit
              >or via rollback).
              >
              >However, this doesn't always appear the case: I have noticed occassionally that
              >several clients "hang," as they wait for the lock that, for some reason, is not
              >being released by its transaction. There do not appear to be any exceptions thrown
              >by the system prior to the system hanging, and the Weblogic administration tool
              >states that all transactions have been committed.
              >
              >If it helps, I have included the general algorithm for the main (i.e., most expensive)
              >transaction:
              >
              >1. a client calls a stateless session EJB's processOrder method (which should
              >implicitly start a new transaction, b/c this method has attibute 'RequiresNew')
              >
              >2. the transaction invokes the LiveOrder finder method (this should lock the DB,
              >so subsequent callers should block until the lock is released).
              >
              >3. the transaction invokes another LiveOrder finder method, returning a separate
              >set of data.
              >
              >4. the transaction invokes a finder method from a separate entity EJB (called
              >Security), which maps to a "read-only" table in the DB (default transaction-isolation
              >level, Required attribute).
              >
              >5. the transaction invokes a finder method from yet another separate entity EJB
              >(called SecurityMarketValues), which maps to some other table (not read-only)
              >in the DB (again, default transaction-isolation level, Required attribute).
              >
              >6. the transaction writes to the SecurityMarketValues entity EJB.
              >
              >7. the transaction writes to the LiveOrders retrieved from steps 2 and 3.
              >
              >8. the transaction ends by exiting method processOrder (thus releasing the locks
              >on the LiveOrder table in the DB).
              >
              >
              >In the system, there also exist other transactions that occassionally call the
              >LiveOrder EJB finder methods, but only briefly to take a "snapshot" of the live
              >order table (i.e., these transactions do not make calls to other DB tables, and
              >close transactions almost immediately after starting them)
              >
              >Like I mentioned before, the system sometimes works, and sometimes it hangs. Any
              >ideas? I'm running out...
              >
              >
              >
              >
              

  • Transaction Isolation Levels

    Hi Everyboody.
    Oracle docs. say that Oracle supports three isolation levels and the isolation level should be set before the transaction begins with the SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL .....
    Resource: http://otn.oracle.com/docs/products/oracle9i/doc_library/release2/server.920/a96524/c21cnsis.htm#2641
    But I find that Oracle 9i supports only two isolation levels, viz. Read Committed and Serializable.
    SQL> SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ ONLY
    2 ;
    SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ ONLY
    ERROR at line 1:
    ORA-02179: valid options: ISOLATION LEVEL { SERIALIZABLE | READ COMMITTED }
    Is READ ONLY isolatin level avalilable in Oracle 9i or is there any problem with my SET instruction?
    Please help me at the earliest.
    Have a nice day!
    Kishore

    Thanks Dmitry.
    It works.
    Continuing on the same thread, I would like to know what is the difference between READ COMMITTED and SERIALIZABLE isolation levels?
    Thank you for your reply.
    Kishore.

  • Setting transaction isolation level rises ORA-02089 error

    Hello
    We have configured a distributed transaction in our application server and
    we are using openjpa 1.2.1 and Glassfish application server and Oracle 11g as DB server. Although the default behavior of transaction locking must be optimistic,
    it seems that pessimistic locking has been happened.
    It is found that Row Lock contention happens in a specific table.
    This is the exception :
    java.sql.SQLException: ORA-02049: timeout: distributed transaction waiting for lock
    Already all the following properties have been set for openjpa.
    1. <persistence-unit name="JPXA" transation-type="JTA">
    2. <property name="openjpa.TransactionMode" value="managed"/>
    You can try a plug-in string to lookup the TM in JNDI (the value is the JNDI name of GlassFish TM as per Google search)
    3. <property name="openjpa.ManagedRuntime"
    value="jndi(TransactionManagerName=java:appserver/TransactionManager)"/>
    Following searching about this locking problem, we found that we should add two more properties for openjpa as listed below.
    <property name="openjpa.LockManager" value="version" />
    <property name="openjpa.jdbc.TransactionIsolation" value="read-committed" />
    but this time by setting the transaction isolation level, we have got another error: org.apache.openjpa.persistence.PersistenceException: ORA-02089: COMMIT is not allowed in a subordinate session.
    Thanks for any help.
    Regards,
    Sargol

    Hello
    We have configured a distributed transaction in our application server and
    we are using openjpa 1.2.1 and Glassfish application server and Oracle 11g as DB server. Although the default behavior of transaction locking must be optimistic,
    it seems that pessimistic locking has been happened.
    It is found that Row Lock contention happens in a specific table.
    This is the exception :
    java.sql.SQLException: ORA-02049: timeout: distributed transaction waiting for lock
    Already all the following properties have been set for openjpa.
    1. <persistence-unit name="JPXA" transation-type="JTA">
    2. <property name="openjpa.TransactionMode" value="managed"/>
    You can try a plug-in string to lookup the TM in JNDI (the value is the JNDI name of GlassFish TM as per Google search)
    3. <property name="openjpa.ManagedRuntime"
    value="jndi(TransactionManagerName=java:appserver/TransactionManager)"/>
    Following searching about this locking problem, we found that we should add two more properties for openjpa as listed below.
    <property name="openjpa.LockManager" value="version" />
    <property name="openjpa.jdbc.TransactionIsolation" value="read-committed" />
    but this time by setting the transaction isolation level, we have got another error: org.apache.openjpa.persistence.PersistenceException: ORA-02089: COMMIT is not allowed in a subordinate session.
    Thanks for any help.
    Regards,
    Sargol

  • Transaction Isolation Level for EJB methods

    L.S.
    I just found out the in OC4J one can not set the transaction isolation level on ejb methods. Moreover one needs to revert to bean managed transaction (manual coding of the ALL transaction logic) to set the isolation level.
    On entity beans one can only set the isolation level for the whole bean (not on individual methods), and in session beans there is no way at all to set the isolation level.
    This is on shear contract to all other application servers I used before (there one can declaratively set the isolation level for a ejb method, both in session and in entitybean deployment descriptors)
    Is it foreseen in a future release to include such a valuable feature will be provided by oc4j?
    Note that I was VERY surprised that OC4J could not handle this (I checked the j2ee spec, but admittedly the spec is a little vague about this support and makes it vendor dependent. the j2ee spec does not mandate this, except for CMP entity beans, but includes some suggestions on this ability. But most other application servers implemented the ability)
    Regadrs,
    Erik

    Hello Erik --
    I think we met in Perth recently?
    Anyway, your information is correct.
    We can set the transaction isolation level for each entity bean, at the bean level. We don't have for the specification of method level isolation settings -- I'd be interested to hear how you would like/do use this. What behaviour do you expect to see when a transaction is started that spans multiple methods on a bean with different declared isolation levels.
    For session beans, we do not currently have the ability to declaratively specify the isolation level to use for the bean. I know this is not in the forthcoming 904 release, and will to check what is beyond that.
    As you point out, this can be done programatically using the Connection.setIsolationLevel() method on any connections you are using from within the session bean.
    I'd would like to log an enhancement request for you for this functionality. Can you send me an email at [email protected] and we'll take it offline.
    -steve-

  • OCJ4's EJB transaction isolation level

    Hello, all
    Does OC4J supports various transaction isolation level?
    I am using JDeveloper to create and deploy
    EJBs and all I can find is transaction attributes,
    and not isolation level. The book I am currently reading
    suggests that there's tx isolation setting in BEA
    WebLogic.
    If anybody has found a way to do this in OC4J + Jdeveloer,
    or if it is ever required, let me know.
    Thanks

    Hi
    You can specify the isolation level using the "isolation" attribute of the "entity-deployment" tag.
    Ex:
    <entity-deployment name="MyEJB" isolation="serializable">
    Go through the DTD for details :
    http://xmlns.oracle.com/ias/dtds/orion-ejb-jar.dtd
    --Shrini                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

  • Default transaction isolation level

    Hi,
    What is the default transaction isolation level in weblogic?
    Is it dependent on the database isolation level?
    Pradeep bhat

    In 6.1, the default transaction isolation level for CMP beans is the level specified
    in the database.
    In 5.1, the default is supposed to be serializable, though there is a bug in 5.1
    that does not set the level at all. I have received a confirmation from Weblogic
    that this is a bug.
    Dan
    "pradeep bhat" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    Hi,
    What is the default transaction isolation level in weblogic?
    Is it dependent on the database isolation level?
    Pradeep bhat

  • Setting transaction isolation level in a session bean

    Hi all!
    In a stateless session bean (EJB3) with container managed transactions I need to set the transaction isolation level to SERIALIZABLE.
    The idea is to prevent lost update on database when multiple accesses occur concurrently.
    Thanks in advance for your patience,
    Tommaso

    Hi all!
    In a stateless session bean (EJB3) with container managed transactions I need to set the transaction isolation level to SERIALIZABLE.
    The idea is to prevent lost update on database when multiple accesses occur concurrently.
    Thanks in advance for your patience,
    Tommaso

  • Transaction Isolation Level to Read UnCommited in Non OLTP Database

    HI,
    We are having a database which for NOT OLTP process. That is OLAP DB. Operation on that DB is only Select and (Incremental Insert - FOR DWH ) not Update/Delete and we are performing ROLAP operations in that DB.
    By Default SQL Server DB isolation Level is READ COMMITTED.AS Our DB IS OLAP SQL Server DB we need to change the isolation level toRead Uncommited. We google it down but We can achive in
    Transaction level only by SET isoaltion Level TO Read UNCOMMITED
    or ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION ON or READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT
    Is there any other way if we can Change the Database isolation level to READ uncommitedfor Entire Database?, insteads of achiving in Transaction Level or With out enabling SET ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION ON or READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT
    Please use Marked as Answer if my post solved your problem and use Vote As Helpful if a post was useful.
    Please use Marked as Answer if my post solved your problem and use Vote As Helpful if a post was useful.

    Hi,
    My first question would be why do you want to change Isolation level to read uncommitted, are you aware about the repercussions you will get dirty data, a wrong data.
    Isolation level is basically associated with the connection so is define in connection.
    >> Transaction level only by SET isoaltion Level TO Read UNCOMMITED or ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION ON or READ_COMMITTED_SNAPSHOT
    Be cautious Read UNCOMMITED  and Snapshot isolation level are not same.The former is pessimistic Isolation level and later is Optimistic.Snapshot isolation levels are totally different from read uncommitted as snapshot Isolation level
    uses row versioning.I guess you wont require snapshot isolation level in O:AP DB.
    Please read below blog about setting Isolation level Server wide
    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ialonso/archive/2012/11/26/how-to-set-the-default-transaction-isolation-level-server-wide.aspx
    Please mark this reply as the answer or vote as helpful, as appropriate, to make it useful for other readers
    My TechNet Wiki Articles

  • Transaction Isolation Levels in weblogic-cmp-rdbms-jar.xml

    Hi All,
    Iam using ejb 1.1 specification with weblogic 5.1. We can set the transaction
    isolation levels for the methods in the
    weblogic-ejb-jar.xml. There is also a provision for setting this isolation level
    in the weblogic-cmp-rdbms-jar.xml. Now is there any difference between setting
    the isolation levels in these two ways.
    Help me asap.

    The CMP setting has been deprecated. You can set it for all types of
    EJBs in the weblogic-ejb-jar.xml
    -- Rob
    chandru wrote:
    Hi All,
    Iam using ejb 1.1 specification with weblogic 5.1. We can set the transaction
    isolation levels for the methods in the
    weblogic-ejb-jar.xml. There is also a provision for setting this isolation level
    in the weblogic-cmp-rdbms-jar.xml. Now is there any difference between setting
    the isolation levels in these two ways.
    Help me asap.

  • Regarding Transaction Isolation Level

    We talk about query and update constent problem again. even I don't take it as problem.
    I can see this in SAP notes or SAP help:
    JDBC Sender Adapter...
    ·        The UPDATE statement must alter exactly those data records that have been selected by the SELECT statement. You can ensure this is the case by using an identical WHERE clause. (See Processing Parameters, SQL Statement for Query, and SQL Statement for Update below).
    ·        Processing can only be performed correctly when the Transaction Isolation Level is set to repeatable_read or serializable.
    If I set transaction isolation level as default, then how can I make sure ' default' is repeatable_read or serializable?
    Our DB is Informix.

    Hey
    Please go through the below blog and see if it helps
    /people/yining.mao/blog/2006/09/13/tips-and-tutorial-for-sender-jdbc-adapter
    Thanks
    Aamir

Maybe you are looking for

  • DataGrid.placeSortArrow(). How to use it

    I want to have a dataGrid sorted upon dataProvider update, and I want the grid to display correctly the sort Arrow so that the user know what is the sorted column, and in what order. The placeSortArrow method seems to be a good candidate, and the doc

  • Question to Z10 apps

    Hello, I´m new here (and from Germany) and I have questions. Actually I have an Android Smartphone, but I want to change to BB and I want to buy a Z10. How is the situation about apps? I ask for a compass (in Android i. e. part of the "Swiss Army Kni

  • I somehow filmed a video upside down, is there a way to flip it?

    I filmed a 16 minute video and somehow it was filmed upside down. So everytime I try to watch it on my iPad, it automatically flips over to being upside down. My son needs access to it. Is there a way to flip the video?

  • Umlaut {or dieresis} for the letter "n"

    How do you get that on a OS X Yosemite keyboard?  And for the letter "n".

  • Challenges in SAP HANA studio

    Hi, I have a trial cloud account. as for now, i foresee that i can work on developing my models by making use of standard tables available in the standard  schemas itself. suppose if i want to create my own tables and make use of them in my views, wi