Locking content in InDesign

HI,
Is it possible to 'lock' or deny access to edit text (or other) elements in InDesign so that I could send an InDesign doc to a third party, and only allow them access to only the elements I'm happy for them to change.
For example. Want them to be able to change pictures in the document, but dont want them to be able to change the text.
Thank you.
Nick.

Don't know what versions of InDesign they support. Don't know if it's reliable at all or would fit your needs. Don't know if it's only something for large companies. Don't know if it will be around the next years (last news blog entry is from June 2012).
No idea what that will cost you, but you could ask:
http://www.1io.com/?force=en
Uwe

Similar Messages

V$system_event, timeouts and row lock contention

Hello everyone,
What is the meaning of the total_timeouts column in the v$system_event view if it is related to the event "enq: TX - row lock contention"?
How can we have a timeout since "query timeout" is a non existent concept on Oracle?
Maybe I am wrong.
Regards.
Carl

Hello everyone,
What is the meaning of the total_timeouts column in
the v$system_event view if it is related to the event
"enq: TX - row lock contention"?
How can we have a timeout since "query timeout" is a
non existent concept on Oracle?
Maybe I am wrong.
Regards.
CarlThe value for timeouts, in this case, indicates the number of times one of the sessions had to wait a full 3 second time slice while waiting for a second session to either commit or roll back, in anticipation of a potential primary key violation. If the second session commits, the first session will receive an error indicating a primary key violation.
Test setup:
In session 2:
CREATE TABLE T1 (C1 VARCHAR2(20) PRIMARY KEY);
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('ORACLE');
In session 1:
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('ORACLE');
After executing tha above, allow 60 seconds to elapse after the insert in session 1, and then check the delta values in either V$SYSTEM_EVENT or V$SESSION_EVENT:
20 waits on ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION, 19 timeouts, 59.99 seconds, with an average wait of 2.9995 seconds.
Charles Hooper
IT Manager/Oracle DBA
K&M Machine-Fabricating, Inc.

How do I create a Table of Contents in InDesign CS6 for print that easily converts to epub?

How do I create a Table of Contents in InDesign CS6 for a print book that easily converts to epub?
Can anyone point me to a link for a step-by-step (not a video) on setting up all the elements of a print book properly (pages, table of contents and index) so they will convert and reflow perfectly from print to epub in InDesign CS6. This is not about building an ebook from ground up, but taking 50 backlisted print books (converted from old versions of Quark to InDesign) that now need to be converted to epub formats.
OR could someone point me to the link in the Adobe InDesign CS6 support that explains how to create a Table of Contents for a print book (5.5" x 8.5", 288 pages), one that will convert when the file is converted to ePub (for MAC OSX)?
Just downloaded the 706 page inDesign CS6 reference manual from Adobe <http://helpx.adobe.com/pdf/indesign_reference.pdf> but there's not even a search feature on the pdf file.
Up until this week, we have only done print books, creating the TOC the old fashioned way, as a fixed page, comprised of two columns: page numbers and chapters/subject. The files I have created are taken by our printer and printed beautifully.
However, when I convert the same book to epub in CS6, the character and paragraph styles converted beautifully - but everything else is all over the place! The table of contents is on different pages, the columns split apart. That goes for the page contents as well - everything is all over the place. when it's converted to a pdf -- total perfection. Never any problems converting with perfection to pdf format and reading those on the various readers.
(Thank you so much in advance for any help).

<http://helpx.adobe.com/pdf/indesign_reference.pdf> Adobe Digital Reader does have a search feature for reading pdfs. Found the TOC instructions on page 176 of 706 pages.

BDB read performance problem: lock contention between GC and VM threads

Problem: BDB read performance is really bad when the size of the BDB crosses 20GB. Once the database crosses 20GB or near there, it takes more than one hour to read/delete/add 200K keys.
After a point, of these 200K keys there are about 15-30K keys that are new and this number eventually should come down and there should not be any new keys after a point.
Application:
Transactional Data Store application. Single threaded process, that's trying to read one key's data, delete the data and add new data. The keys are really small (20 bytes) and the data is large (grows from 1KB to 100KB)
On on machine, I have a total of 3 processes running with each process accessing its own BDB on a separate RAID1+0 drive. So, according to me there should really be no disk i/o wait that's slowing down the reads.
After a point (past 20GB), There are about 4-5 million keys in my BDB and the data associated with each key could be anywhere between 1KB to 100KB. Eventually every key will have 100KB data associated with it.
Hardware:
16 core Intel Xeon, 96GB of RAM, 8 drive, running 2.6.18-194.26.1.0.1.el5 #1 SMP x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
BDB config: BTREE
bdb version: 4.8.30
bdb cache size: 4GB
bdb page size: experimented with 8KB, 64KB.
3 processes, each process accesses its own BDB on a separate RAIDed(1+0) drive.
envConfig.setAllowCreate(true);
envConfig.setTxnNoSync(ourConfig.asynchronous);
envConfig.setThreaded(true);
envConfig.setInitializeLocking(true);
envConfig.setLockDetectMode(LockDetectMode.DEFAULT);
When writing to BDB: (Asynchrounous transactions)
TransactionConfig tc = new TransactionConfig();
tc.setNoSync(true);
When reading from BDB (Allow reading from Uncommitted pages):
CursorConfig cc = new CursorConfig();
cc.setReadUncommitted(true);
BDB stats: BDB size 49GB
$ db_stat -m
3GB 928MB Total cache size
1 Number of caches
1 Maximum number of caches
3GB 928MB Pool individual cache size
0 Maximum memory-mapped file size
0 Maximum open file descriptors
0 Maximum sequential buffer writes
0 Sleep after writing maximum sequential buffers
0 Requested pages mapped into the process' address space
2127M Requested pages found in the cache (97%)
57M Requested pages not found in the cache (57565917)
6371509 Pages created in the cache
57M Pages read into the cache (57565917)
75M Pages written from the cache to the backing file (75763673)
60M Clean pages forced from the cache (60775446)
2661382 Dirty pages forced from the cache
0 Dirty pages written by trickle-sync thread
500593 Current total page count
500593 Current clean page count
0 Current dirty page count
524287 Number of hash buckets used for page location
4096 Assumed page size used
2248M Total number of times hash chains searched for a page (2248788999)
9 The longest hash chain searched for a page
2669M Total number of hash chain entries checked for page (2669310818)
0 The number of hash bucket locks that required waiting (0%)
0 The maximum number of times any hash bucket lock was waited for (0%)
0 The number of region locks that required waiting (0%)
0 The number of buffers frozen
0 The number of buffers thawed
0 The number of frozen buffers freed
63M The number of page allocations (63937431)
181M The number of hash buckets examined during allocations (181211477)
16 The maximum number of hash buckets examined for an allocation
63M The number of pages examined during allocations (63436828)
1 The max number of pages examined for an allocation
0 Threads waited on page I/O
0 The number of times a sync is interrupted
Pool File: lastPoints
8192 Page size
0 Requested pages mapped into the process' address space
2127M Requested pages found in the cache (97%)
57M Requested pages not found in the cache (57565917)
6371509 Pages created in the cache
57M Pages read into the cache (57565917)
75M Pages written from the cache to the backing file (75763673)
$ db_stat -l
0x40988 Log magic number
16 Log version number
31KB 256B Log record cache size
0 Log file mode
10Mb Current log file size
856M Records entered into the log (856697337)
941GB 371MB 67KB 112B Log bytes written
2GB 262MB 998KB 478B Log bytes written since last checkpoint
31M Total log file I/O writes (31624157)
31M Total log file I/O writes due to overflow (31527047)
97136 Total log file flushes
686 Total log file I/O reads
96414 Current log file number
4482953 Current log file offset
96414 On-disk log file number
4482862 On-disk log file offset
1 Maximum commits in a log flush
1 Minimum commits in a log flush
160KB Log region size
195 The number of region locks that required waiting (0%)
$ db_stat -c
7 Last allocated locker ID
0x7fffffff Current maximum unused locker ID
9 Number of lock modes
2000 Maximum number of locks possible
2000 Maximum number of lockers possible
2000 Maximum number of lock objects possible
160 Number of lock object partitions
0 Number of current locks
1218 Maximum number of locks at any one time
5 Maximum number of locks in any one bucket
0 Maximum number of locks stolen by for an empty partition
0 Maximum number of locks stolen for any one partition
0 Number of current lockers
8 Maximum number of lockers at any one time
0 Number of current lock objects
1218 Maximum number of lock objects at any one time
5 Maximum number of lock objects in any one bucket
0 Maximum number of objects stolen by for an empty partition
0 Maximum number of objects stolen for any one partition
400M Total number of locks requested (400062331)
400M Total number of locks released (400062331)
0 Total number of locks upgraded
1 Total number of locks downgraded
0 Lock requests not available due to conflicts, for which we waited
0 Lock requests not available due to conflicts, for which we did not wait
0 Number of deadlocks
0 Lock timeout value
0 Number of locks that have timed out
0 Transaction timeout value
0 Number of transactions that have timed out
1MB 544KB The size of the lock region
0 The number of partition locks that required waiting (0%)
0 The maximum number of times any partition lock was waited for (0%)
0 The number of object queue operations that required waiting (0%)
0 The number of locker allocations that required waiting (0%)
0 The number of region locks that required waiting (0%)
5 Maximum hash bucket length
$ db_stat -CA
Default locking region information:
7 Last allocated locker ID
0x7fffffff Current maximum unused locker ID
9 Number of lock modes
2000 Maximum number of locks possible
2000 Maximum number of lockers possible
2000 Maximum number of lock objects possible
160 Number of lock object partitions
0 Number of current locks
1218 Maximum number of locks at any one time
5 Maximum number of locks in any one bucket
0 Maximum number of locks stolen by for an empty partition
0 Maximum number of locks stolen for any one partition
0 Number of current lockers
8 Maximum number of lockers at any one time
0 Number of current lock objects
1218 Maximum number of lock objects at any one time
5 Maximum number of lock objects in any one bucket
0 Maximum number of objects stolen by for an empty partition
0 Maximum number of objects stolen for any one partition
400M Total number of locks requested (400062331)
400M Total number of locks released (400062331)
0 Total number of locks upgraded
1 Total number of locks downgraded
0 Lock requests not available due to conflicts, for which we waited
0 Lock requests not available due to conflicts, for which we did not wait
0 Number of deadlocks
0 Lock timeout value
0 Number of locks that have timed out
0 Transaction timeout value
0 Number of transactions that have timed out
1MB 544KB The size of the lock region
0 The number of partition locks that required waiting (0%)
0 The maximum number of times any partition lock was waited for (0%)
0 The number of object queue operations that required waiting (0%)
0 The number of locker allocations that required waiting (0%)
0 The number of region locks that required waiting (0%)
5 Maximum hash bucket length
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lock REGINFO information:
Lock Region type
5 Region ID
__db.005 Region name
0x2accda678000 Region address
0x2accda678138 Region primary address
0 Region maximum allocation
0 Region allocated
Region allocations: 6006 allocations, 0 failures, 0 frees, 1 longest
Allocations by power-of-two sizes:
1KB 6002
2KB 0
4KB 0
8KB 0
16KB 1
32KB 0
64KB 2
128KB 0
256KB 1
512KB 0
1024KB 0
REGION_JOIN_OK Region flags
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lock region parameters:
524317 Lock region region mutex [0/9 0% 5091/47054587432128]
2053 locker table size
2053 object table size
944 obj_off
226120 locker_off
0 need_dd
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lock conflict matrix:
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Locks grouped by lockers:
Locker Mode Count Status ----------------- Object ---------------
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Locks grouped by object:
Locker Mode Count Status ----------------- Object ---------------
Diagnosis:
I'm seeing way to much lock contention on the Java Garbage Collector threads and also the VM thread when I strace my java process and I don't understand the behavior.
We are spending more than 95% of the time trying to acquire locks and I don't know what these locks are. Any info here would help.
Earlier I thought the overflow pages were the problem as 100KB data size was exceeding all overflow page limits. So, I implemented duplicate keys concept by chunking of my data to fit to overflow page limits.
Now I don't see any overflow pages in my system but I still see bad bdb read performance.
$ strace -c -f -p 5642 --->(607 times the lock timed out, errors)
Process 5642 attached with 45 threads - interrupt to quit
% time     seconds usecs/call     calls    errors syscall
98.19    7.670403        2257      3398       607 futex
0.84    0.065886           8      8423           pread
0.69    0.053980        4498        12           fdatasync
0.22    0.017094           5      3778           pwrite
0.05    0.004107           5       808           sched_yield
0.00    0.000120          10        12           read
0.00    0.000110           9        12           open
0.00    0.000089           7        12           close
0.00    0.000025           0      1431           clock_gettime
0.00    0.000000           0        46           write
0.00    0.000000           0         1         1 stat
0.00    0.000000           0        12           lseek
0.00    0.000000           0        26           mmap
0.00    0.000000           0        88           mprotect
0.00    0.000000           0        24           fcntl
100.00    7.811814                 18083       608 total
The above stats show that there is too much time spent locking (futex calls) and I don't understand that because
the application is really single-threaded. I have turned on asynchronous transactions so the writes might be
flushed asynchronously in the background but spending that much time locking and timing out seems wrong.
So, there is possibly something I'm not setting or something weird with the way JVM is behaving on my box.
I grep-ed for futex calls in one of my strace log snippet and I see that there is a VM thread that grabbed the mutex
maximum number(223) of times and followed by Garbage Collector threads: the following is the lock counts and thread-pids
within the process:
These are the 10 GC threads (each thread has grabbed lock on an avg 85 times):
  86 [8538]
  85 [8539]
  91 [8540]
  91 [8541]
  92 [8542]
  87 [8543]
  90 [8544]
  96 [8545]
  87 [8546]
  97 [8547]
  96 [8548]
  91 [8549]
  91 [8550]
  80 [8552]
VM Periodic Task Thread" prio=10 tid=0x00002aaaf4065000 nid=0x2180 waiting on condition (Main problem??)
223 [8576] ==> grabbing a lock 223 times -- not sure why this is happening…
"pool-2-thread-1" prio=10 tid=0x00002aaaf44b7000 nid=0x21c8 runnable [0x0000000042aa8000] -- main worker thread
   34 [8648] (main thread grabs futex only 34 times when compared to all the other threads)
The load average seems ok; though my system thinks it has very less memory left and that
I think is because its using up a lot of memory for the file system cache?
top - 23:52:00 up 6 days, 8:41, 1 user, load average: 3.28, 3.40, 3.44
Tasks: 229 total, 1 running, 228 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 3.2%us, 0.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 87.5%id, 8.3%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 98999820k total, 98745988k used, 253832k free, 530372k buffers
Swap: 18481144k total, 1304k used, 18479840k free, 89854800k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
8424 rchitta 16 0 7053m 6.2g 4.4g S 18.3 6.5 401:01.88 java
8422 rchitta 15 0 7011m 6.1g 4.4g S 14.6 6.5 528:06.92 java
8423 rchitta 15 0 6989m 6.1g 4.4g S 5.7 6.5 615:28.21 java
$ java -version
java version "1.6.0_21"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_21-b06)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 17.0-b16, mixed mode)
Maybe I should make my application a Concurrent Data Store app as there is really only one thread doing the writes and reads. But I would like
to understand why my process is spending so much time in locking.
Can I try any other options? How do I prevent such heavy locking from happening? Has anyone seen this kind of behavior? Maybe this is
all normal. I'm pretty new to using BDB.
If there is a way to disable locking that would also work as there is only one thread that's really doing all the job.
Should I disable the file system cache? One thing is that my application does not utilize cache very well as once I visit a key, I don't visit that
key again for a very long time so its very possible that the key has to be read again from the disk.
It is possible that I'm thinking this completely wrong and focussing too much on locking behavior and the problem is else where.
Any thoughts/suggestions etc are welcome. Your help on this is much appreciated.
Thanks,
Rama

Hi,
Looks like you're using BDB, not BDB JE, and this is the BDB JE forum. Could you please repost here?:
Berkeley DB
Thanks,
mark

TX - row lock contention in SELECT query without update clause

Hi,
We are having problem in one of our application on production. The ASH report shows 'eq: Tx row lock contention' for only Select statements. There is no FOR UPDATE in the select statements. The exact statement is
enq: TX - row lock contention : SELECT COUNT (1) FROM Table1 WHERE col1= :1 AND col2= :1 AND col3= :1 AND ROWNUM = 1
enq: TX - row lock contention : SELECT MODULE_CD , MSG_DESC , SEVERITY FROM GS_ERROR_MSG WHERE MSG_NUM = :1
I don't know why the select are locking the table rows and resulting in waits..
Our environment is Oracle 10g and Forms & Reports..
Please help.
-- Prashant

Hi,
are you sure that there is no dml against the tables?
You can query v$active_session_history (eg column BLOCKING_SESSION) to see which session locked the row.
HTH..
- wiZ

How can I lock content behind a paid gateway in Muse w /BC hosting?

Does anyone know how I can lock content byhind a paid gateway within Muse with Business Catalyst hosting?

You would have to upgrade up to the eCommerce plan if you wanted to use payment gateways with BC. If you want to give access to certain content to people manually you would need to upgrade up to the Marketing plan at least to use BC's Secure Zones.
However, if you have done the site in Muse and want to continue to use Muse with it, then it will take some extensive knowledge of Business Catalyst.

Property Inspector for Locked Content Doesn't Set Content Dirty

I have a property inspector for my locked content. When the
user sets a new value in the inspector, the orig attribute of the
MM:BeginLock tag is updated appropriately. Unfortunately,
Dreamweaver doesn't see that change as having modified the document
in a meaningful way, so it doesn't enable the Refresh Design View
buttons. Hitting F5, the hotkey for Refresh Design View, has no
effect.
Do you have a suggestion how I can make Dreamweaver think the
content is modified?

Hello,
without going into the specifics of your question, have you checked the following SDN blog?
/people/dolores.correa/blog/2007/09/18/sending-e-mail-from-support-message
I hope this helps.
Best regards,
Miguel Ariñ

Index contention & row lock contention

Hi,
Recently our application loaded a handsome amount of data into our production database. The process took around 5 to 6 hours. During this process, we observed that the performance degraded.
The major wait events are
1) TX index contention (concurrency) and
2) ROW LOCK CONTENTION (application).
The sql which lead to index contention is a simple insert statement into a table x and row lock contention is into a table y.
Both x and y are major detail tables of our application. X has around 4 foreign keys, one foriegn key is referencing table y. the foreign key column x is indexed.
our database is on 10gR2 and using ASSM.
The data block wait event stats during the load process is as follows
select * from dba_hist_waitstat where snap_id between '21454' and '21462' AND WAIT_COUNT>0 and class='data block';
SNAP_ID DBID INSTANCE_NUMBER CLASS WAIT_COUNT TIME
21454 3937665896 1 data block 195089769 33899167
21455 3937665896 1 data block 195095958 33902183
21456 3937665896 1 data block 195096398 33902377
21457 3937665896 1 data block 195097225 33902843
21458 3937665896 1 data block 195628987 34037147
21459 3937665896 1 data block 195944006 34055524
21460 3937665896 1 data block 195944496 34055642
21461 3937665896 1 data block 196183308 34112433
21462 3937665896 1 data block 196213292 34127409
9 rows selected.
select snap_id,eq_type,req_reason, total_req#, total_wait#,failed_req#, cum_wait_time from dba_hist_enqueue_stat where snap_id between '21454' and '21462' and failed_req#>0 and eq_type='TM'
SYS@sqdb AS SYSDBA> /
SNAP_ID EQ REQ_REASON TOTAL_REQ# TOTAL_WAIT# FAILED_REQ# CUM_WAIT_TIME
21454 TM contention 682928465 14 2735 1750
21455 TM contention 682939964 14 2735 1750
21456 TM contention 682950668 14 2735 1750
21457 TM contention 682967980 14 2735 1750
21458 TM contention 682983109 14 2735 1750
21459 TM contention 682998136 14 2735 1750
21460 TM contention 683006816 14 2735 1750
21461 TM contention 683018179 14 2735 1750
21462 TM contention 683432945 14 2735 1750
9 rows selected.
I dont see any significant ITL contention on these objects compared to other contention. (from segment statistics)
SYS@sqdb AS SYSDBA> select b.object_name,a.snap_id, a.physical_writes_total,a.physical_writes_delta,a.physical_reads_total,a.physical_reads_delta, a.itl_waits_total,a.itl_waits_delta from dba_hist_seg_stat a,(select object_id,object_name from dba_objects where owner='ABCD') b where snap_id between '21454' and '21462' and a.obj#= b.object_id and a.itl_waits_delta> 0 order by itl_waits_delta,2,1;
OBJECT_NAME SNAP_ID PHYSICAL_WRITES_TOTAL PHYSICAL_WRITES_DELTA PHYSICAL_READS_TOTAL PHYSICAL_READS_DELTA ITL_WAITS_TOTAL ITL_WAITS_DELTA
IX4_Y 21462 37958 169 105668 174 38 1
IX4_X 21462 102380 1480 147196 5780 56 1
As per the application design, for each row of Y, there are multiple number of rows in X and it varies. What additional information do you think I should be collecting and any tips to fix the issue?
Thanks,
Murthy

hi
Are you using in your insert statement something like "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE"
post the result of this query during the error:
SELECT * FROM DBA_BLOCKERS;
SELECT * FROM DBA_WAITERS;

Tuning row lock contention wait events

Hello everyone,
Working on 10g/windows
Top 5 events
EVENT TOTAL_WAITS TIME_WAITED AVG_MS PERCENT
CPU 9462339 48
enq: TX - row lock contention 12531 3660728 2921.34 18
control file parallel write 1300731 3088079 23.74 16
log file parallel write 1510503 1264080 8.37 6
log file sync 1072553 968007 9.03 5
Distribution of row lock wait during the last 4 days in the database server
END_INTERVAL_TIME TOTAL_WAITS TIME_WAITED_MICRO AVG_WAIT_MS
2008-04-01 16:00:58 909 2721008230 2993.41
2008-04-01 15:00:27 50 149941140 2998.82
2008-03-31 12:00:42 193 575595397 2982.36
2008-03-29 23:00:13 172 513058700 2982.9
2008-03-29 22:00:37 164 483940046 2950.85
2008-03-27 22:00:35 565 1667120838 2950.66
2008-03-26 18:00:59 348 1042918982 2996.89
My analysis:
It's obvious that the row lock contention wait time is huge, and this direct me to find out SQL stmt, causing this.
all the SQL statement was SELECT ....... FOR UPDATE stmt.
I was also able to find out locked tables.
My tuning idea:
1. I'm thinking to reorganize hot tables as well as their indexes, but by instinct it seems to not give so much value to avoid the huge row lock wait time.
2. I'm also seeing if I can reduce the number of rows per block, by increasing PCTFREE and diminishing PCTUSED, so the contention will spread over many blocks instead of one heavy block.
Question
As SQL stmt related to those locked tables are select ... for update, how could I tune this kind of stmt?
Does someone have other idea to come up with this row lock contention?
Tanks for your effort and help

Taking another look at your suggested function based index, it depends on the data type of the DEV.POS_FOLIO_ID.POS_FOLIO_ID column. If the column is defined as a number, and it is a primary key, there will already be a usable index on that column.
Yesterday, I wrote this: "Once I understood why or how the sessions were trying to insert duplicate primary key values, I would try to determine why the average number of seconds for the wait event is almost 3 seconds (maybe a timeout)."
After fixing the formatting of the top 5 wait events (total duration unknown):
EVENT                        TOTAL_WAITS TIME_WAITED   AVG_MS PERCENT
CPU                                         94,623.39             48
enq: TX - row lock contention     12,531    36,607.28 2921.34    18
control file parallel write    1,300,731    30,880.79    23.74    16
log file parallel write        1,510,503    12,640.80     8.37     6
log file sync                  1,072,553     9,680.07     9.03     512,531 * 3 second time out = 37,593 seconds = 10.44 hours.
What if the reason for the 3 second average wait time is due to a timeout. I performed a little experiment... I changed a row in a test table and then made a pot of coffee.
In session 1:
CREATE TABLE T1 (
C1 NUMBER(10),
C2 NUMBER(10),
PRIMARY KEY (C1));
INSERT INTO T1
SELECT
ROWNUM,
ROWNUM*10
FROM
DUAL
CONNECT BY
LEVEL<=1000000;
COMMIT;I now have a test table with 1,000,000 rows. I start monitoring the changes in the wait events roughly every 60 seconds, and V$SESSION_WAIT and V$LOCK roughly 4 times per second.
Back in session 1:
UPDATE
T1
SET
C1=-C1
WHERE
C1<=100;I have now modified the first 100 rows that were inserted into the table, time to make the pot of coffee.
In session 2, I try to insert a row with a primary key value of -10:
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES (
-10,
10);Session 2 hangs.
If I take the third 60 second snap of the system wide wait events as the zero point, and the 11th snap as the end point. There were 149 waits on ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION, 148 time outs, 446.62 seconds of total time in the wait event, with an average wait time of 2.997450 seconds.
Rolling down to the session level wait events, SID 208 (my session 2) had 149 waits on ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION, for a total time of 446.61 seconds with an average wait time of 2.997383 seconds. All of the 149 waits and the wait time was in this one session that was locked up for the full duration of this time period because session 1 was making a pot of coffee.
Rolling down to V$SESSION_WAIT (sampled roughly 4 times per second): At the start of the third time interval, SID 208 has been in the ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION wait event for 39 seconds and is actively waiting trying to execute SQL with a hash value of 1001532423, the wait object is -1, wait file is 0, wait block is 0, wait row is 0, P1 is 1415053316, P2 is 196646, P3 is 4754.
At the end of the 11th time interval: , SID 208 has been in the ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION wait event for 483 seconds and is actively waiting trying to execute SQL with a hash value of 1001532423, the wait object is -1, wait file is 0, wait block is 0, wait row is 0, P1 is 1415053316, P2 is 196646, P3 is 4754.
Rolling down to V$LOCK (sampled roughly 4 times per second): I see that SID 214 (session 1) is blocking SID 208 (session 2). SID 214 has a TX lock in mode 6 with ID1 of 196646 and ID2 of 4754. SID 208 is requesting a TX lock in mode 4 with ID1 of 196646 and ID2 of 4754.
So, it seems that I need a faster coffee pot rather than an additional index on my table. It could be that the above process would have found that the application associated with SID 214 was abandoned or crashed and for some reason the lock was not released for a long period of time, a little less than 10.44 hours in your case.
Charles Hooper
IT Manager/Oracle DBA
K&M Machine-Fabricating, Inc.

Heavy row lock contention

Guys,
I really appreciate your views on this.. Please can some one who have worked on RAC and have an understanding how RAC works, guide me.
We currently are running a loadtest on one of the new RAC system and we are seeing excessive row lock contention for one table. The table basically has very few rows, say about 6-8 and pretty much every user uses this table to lock rows before fetching some data from other tables. When have a heavy load, we see very high wait on this table and enq TX : Row lock contention.
What is the best way to avoid this ? Is there anyway, we can modify the design of the application and ensure locking.. The typical query that locks the rows in the table looks like this
SELECT WL0.CLUB_NAME, WL0.SCHEDULE_ID FROM VF_BINGO_NEXT_CLUB_DRAW WL0 WHERE ( WL0.CLUB_NAME = :1 ) FOR UPDATE As said, they table has only 6-8 rows, so query plan etc doesn't apply. Please can someone who have extensive application knowledge guide me thru ?
Many thanks in advance.
G

> But is there a way to alliviate the concurrency issue, if there is a genuine
requirement to hold lock on a table. What other options do we have other
than locking ?
The purpose of a lock is to ensure data consistency - only 1 process can change that row. So what I find puzzling is why so many app sessions want to change that single row. What data does that row hold that requires continual change? Just what is the purpose of this data if it is consistently and continually changing? What business requirement does it attempt to solve?
To be honest, this sounds like a major design problem to me.
Like the surrogate key generator approach I mentioned. You create a PK_SEQUENCE table with columns (tablename, pk_value). Any insert against a table requires a lock on PK_SEQUENCE for the table being inserted into - a read of the PK_VALUE, incrementing it by one and then updating that row with the latest sequence. This way each INSERT gets a "nice sequential number" to use as surrogate key for new rows.
Even when this is done as an autonomous transaction, it introduces a very expensive resource - why? Because only one session at a time can be serviced by that resource.
If there are a lot of INSERTs into a table, this approach will quickly become a severe bottleneck as every single insert requires a new surrogate key value and a lock on that PK_SEQUENCE table to obtain that value.
This problem is solved by allowing/enabling such a resource to serve multiple sessions concurrently. Which is for example what Oracle Sequence objects do within this example I've described.
The bottom line is that the design you describe introduced a bottleneck by create an expensive and serialised resource that can only serve a single session at a time.
You need to re-look at the business requirement - and find another way to solve it than to introduce this type of serialised resource and contention.

Row lock contention...

Hello,
I am working on Oracle 10.2.0.4 on AIX .
In awr reports we found 'row lock contention' as top wait events. As my knowledge There are two types of locks..
1. Deadlock - where oracle will automatically rollback the locking query and generate deadlock trace file.
2. A user session update some rows and not commit/rollback , so other sessions which need to lock same rows , were witing. So dba need to manully kill first
session which was holding lock.
We want to know , in which of above scenario in awr report we can see 'row lock contention' wait.
any idea ..

Ok, first, I think your definitions are a bit off.
There is the concept of a lock, or an enqueue. The terms 'lock' and 'enqueue' are synonymous, in Oracle.
A lock (or enqueue) protects a 'resource'. A TX (transaction) enqueue protects rows which have been locked. Only one transaction is permitted to modify a specific row in a specific table, at a time, for obvious reasons.
A row-level lock occurs when a session attempts to modify a row that another session has already locked. When that occurs, the session attempting the lock will wait on a TX enqueue.
These types of locks occur all the time in Oracle, and are not necessarily a bad thing. They are a sign that Oracle is protecting the integrity of your data, and that's a good thing.
However, when waits on row-level locks begin to dominate the response time of your application, then you have a problem. Generally, this is going to come down to your application design. How can you avoid concurrent sessions colliding on their updates to specific rows? This is something that only you, with your knowledge of your application, can answer.
Finally, you mentioned the term 'deadlock' before. A deadlock occurs when two or more sessions are simultaneously holding a lock that the other is waiting on, while waiting on a lock the other is holding.
A simple example would be as follows:
Consider table_a, with row1 and row2.
Session 1 takes a lock on row1, no problem.
Session 2 takes a lock on row2, no problem.
Now, session 1 attempts to take a lock on row2, but session 2 has lock, so it waits.
Now, session 2 attempts to take a lock on row1, but session 1 has lock, so it waits.
This is a deadlock. It would wait forever. But, the Oracle kernel has a deadlock detection mechanism. So, within 3 seconds, Oracle will detect a deadlock, and one of the sessions (usually the one that has been waiting the longest) will catch ORA-00060 deadlock detected, and statement level rollback will occur.
Hope that clarifies your questions and/or doubts,
-Mark

Row lock contention error to resolve

hi,
i m facing sever issue with row lock contention error for the statement and causing concurrency and application usage more making database vulnerable
UPDATE RULE_DATA SET RULE_DATA = :B3 , UPDATED_BY = :B2 , UPDATED_DATE = SYSDATE WHERE RULE_DATA_SEQ_ID = :B1
RETURNING PAT_GEN_DETAIL_SEQ_ID INTO :O0
in this query RULE_DATA_SEQ_ID is primary key and and having index too, how can i over come row lock contention error ,
if i try like this will it work
UPDATE RULE_DATA SET RULE_DATA = :B3 , UPDATED_BY = :B2 , UPDATED_DATE = SYSDATE WHERE RULE_DATA_SEQ_ID = :B1
RETURNING PAT_GEN_DETAIL_SEQ_ID INTO :O0
log errors into temp_log (sysdate||:O0 ) REJECT LIMIT UNLIMITED;
commit;
please help me;

select sid, sql_text from v$session s, v$sql q
where sid in (select sid from v$session
where state in ('WAITING')
and wait_class != 'Idle'
and event='enq: TX - row lock contention'
and (q.sql_id = s.sql_id or q.sql_id = s.prev_sql_id));
from the above query if found the sid and sql_text,
actually three procedures been called at once as a batch from java and given auto commit at once for the batch;
and in one of the procedure it is called by multiple times with different seq_id's
what i thought is by logging error can we skip the update statement from locking , this what happening
where v_tariff_detail_seq_id will be 25,26,28,29,30 like records
begin
IF v_tariff_detail_seq_id = 0 THEN
INSERT INTO pat_tariff_details (
tariff_detail_seq_id,
pat_gen_detail_seq_id,
ward_type_id ,
room_type_id ,
days_of_stay ,
requested_amount,
approved_amount,
maximum_allowed_amount,
notes,
added_by,
added_date )
VALUES (
pat_tariff_details_seq.NEXTVAL ,
v_pat_gen_detail_seq_id,
v_ward_type_id ,
v_room_type_id ,
v_days_of_stay ,
v_requested_amount ,
v_approved_amount,
v_maximum_allowed_amount,
v_notes,
v_added_by,
SYSDATE );
ELSE
UPDATE pat_tariff_details SET
room_type_id = v_room_type_id,
days_of_stay = v_days_of_stay,
requested_amount = v_requested_amount,
approved_amount = v_approved_amount,
maximum_allowed_amount = v_maximum_allowed_amount,
notes = v_notes,
updated_by = v_added_by,
updated_date = SYSDATE
WHERE tariff_detail_seq_id = v_tariff_detail_seq_id;
END IF;
end;
version is Oracle Database 10g Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bit Production
Edited by: user13134817 on Nov 2, 2012 2:39 AM

Row lock contention on WWV_FLOW_DATA

I'm hosting an APEX app on one of my Oracle servers
Oracle 10.1.0.4.0
APEX 3.0.0
The users (and APEX developer) are complaining about slow performance. One of the primary reasons seems to be as a result of row lock contention. And as this is on an APEX table, I think it is fair to think that this is not a finger-up-nose mistake from the APEX developer.
This is what I for example just saw some minutes ago. 3 APEX sessions running for application 103 and page 1 according to V$SESSION.
Wait status for all 3 sessions (ticking over into many minutes) is:
enq: TX - row lock contention
The one session shows this SQL:
INSERT INTO WWV_FLOW_DATA ( FLOW_INSTANCE, ITEM_ID, ITEM_VALUE )
VALUES ( :B4 , :B3 , :B2 ||':'||:B1 ||':0:0')
The other two sessions shows this SQL:
UPDATE WWV_FLOW_DATA SET ITEM_VALUE = NVL(NVL(:B6 ,:B5 ),1)||':'
|| NVL(NVL(:B4 ,:B3 ),15)||':0:0' WHERE ITEM_ID = :B2 AND FLOW_I
NSTANCE = :B1
Fair to assume that all 3 are hitting the same row? (same flow instance and item?)
I've done some searching and it seems that a lot of dead locks have been reported on similar APEX tables. Is this potentially the same underlaying issue, but with just slightly different symptoms?
Some speculation... tabbed browsing is very common with Firefox. I often open multiple tabs on the same APEX app for different pages. What will the back-end impact be if this is done on the same page? Could it be that APEX expects a single-HTTP-request-at-a-time-from-a-web-session?
What does not make sense though is why the update will show row lock contention, assuming all 3 hit the same row. The INSERT should when inserting a row with the same PK as that of an uncommitted inserted row of another session. But why would the UPDATEs in this scenario show row lock enqueues? The INSERT row enqueue points that the row has not yet been committed. If so, the 3rd session's UPDATE should return "no row found" and not be stuck on a row lock enqueue.. right?
This does not make much sense to me.
Any comments, suggestions, and ideas to troubleshoot and resolve this will be much appreciated.

> When you and the APEX developer say "slow performance", have you ensured
that this is not logic in the APEX application itself?
The "slow performance" the APEX developer and users mention are usually pages timing out all together. There are no real heavy and complex SQLs executed to my knowledge (none I see on the server side). So I do not think it is an application SQL issue - besides, the "slow performance" on the back-end side, when reported, I seen as sessions spinning on enqueue TX locks.
Not my APEX system so I'm not that familiar with it, but I had a quick look at it. The pages are relatively simplistic as there is no custom stuff (unlike some my APEX apps ;-) ).
Also, this problem does not occur on a specific page, but intermittently on different pages.
> were they all for the same APEX session emanating from the same client?
Unsure.. I kind of expect these will have to be or else the SQL statement will be hitting a different flows row all together (which is why I speculated about the tabbed browser issue). Busy investigating this closer.
>Have statistics been computed recently on the FLOWS_030000 schema?
No. Interesting point as I've (very stupidly) never even considered running DBMS_STATS on the flows schema...
What is interesting btw is that SQL is not static. The latest blocks (same event, same symptoms as described in my original posting) were on this SQL:
UPDATE WWV_FLOW_PREFERENCES$ SET ATTRIBUTE_VALUE = :B5 WHERE USE
R_ID = NVL(:B4 ,NVL(:B3 ,USER)) AND PREFERENCE_NAME = :B2 AND SE
CURITY_GROUP_ID = :B1
It also could be as a result of multiple sessions from the same web browser due to clicking a button/link more than once, or refreshing the browser without waiting at least a few seconds for a response.. (also, the fact that the browser is waiting for a response is not very visual/noticeable to the user)
Am planning to spend some time on this issue tomorrow and will try and provide better technical feedback.
If you have anything specific I can test from my side, please just shout Joel.

Row lock contention problem on Inventory Management

Hi
My client is product based company and have e-Commerce (online Sale Order) application using Oracle database 10.2.0.5 & Web application deployed on WLS. Client have ~ 90 Warehouse country wide and ~ 200 Products (Items). Each product stock for each warehouse is maintained in Inventory Table (INV_BALANCE) which get updated for each order and their sale's products. We are using NO WAIT function to acquire lock on row to update stock balance. Last few months, client business is growing very fast and during Promotional Events (EXPO), they have sales of ~ 75K orders (~ 250K Items) within 2-3 days which start causing row lock contention problem on INV_BALANCE table. We are seeing lots of "Row Lock Wait" and "enq: TX - row lock contention" event which cause ORA-00060: Deadlock detected and we need to eventually clear blocking sessions or everything just choked.
select statistic_name,value from sys.v_$segment_statistics where object_name = 'INV_BALANCE'
STATISTIC_NAME                                                                                                                        VALUE
logical reads                                                                                                                                12423072
buffer busy waits                                                                                                                           3895
db block changes                                                                                                                         3516768
physical reads                                                                                                                               957
physical writes                                                                                                                            12197
row lock waits                                                                                                                             49909
space used                                                                                                                                -52921
Deadlock graph:
                       ---------Blocker(s)-------- ---------Waiter(s)---------
Resource Name          process session holds waits process session holds waits
TX-00880017-00002584       321    1675     X            110    1445           X
TX-00b60008-00000741       110    1445     X            337    2158           X
TX-0148000b-0000009e       337    2158     X            378    1525           X
TX-01d50015-0000006f       378    1525     X            363    1842           X
TX-02290012-00000070       363    1842     X            267    1798           X
TX-024a0026-0000006e       267    1798     X            364    2084           X
TX-020a0004-0000006f       364    2084     X            135    2113           X
TX-01dc001f-00000070       135    2113     X            129    1586           X
session 1675: DID 0001-0141-000001CA    session 1445: DID 0001-006E-00000202
session 1445: DID 0001-006E-00000202    session 2158: DID 0001-0151-0000026B
session 2158: DID 0001-0151-0000026B    session 1525: DID 0001-017A-00000167
session 1525: DID 0001-017A-00000167    session 1842: DID 0001-016B-000002B4
session 1842: DID 0001-016B-000002B4    session 1798: DID 0001-010B-000001F1
Rows waited on:
Session 1445: obj - rowid = 0001AE0E - AAAlK8AAHAAD7rMABY
(dictionary objn - 110094, file - 7, block - 1030860, slot - 88)
Session 2158: obj - rowid = 0001AE0E - AAAlK8AAHAAD7rMACD
(dictionary objn - 110094, file - 7, block - 1030860, slot - 131)
Session 1525: obj - rowid = 0001AE0E - AAAlK8AAHAAD7rOAB2
(dictionary objn - 110094, file - 7, block - 1030862, slot - 118)
Information on the OTHER waiting sessions:
Session 1445:
sid: 1445 ser: 37 audsid: 38316795 user: 69/<none>
            program: JDBC Thin Client
application name: JDBC Thin Client, hash value=2546894660
Current SQL Statement:
SELECT ROWID, NVL(QTY_PEND,0)+NVL(:B3 ,0) FROM INV_BALANCE WHERE WHS_ID = :B2 AND STOCK_ID = :B1 FOR UPDATE OF QTY_PEND WAIT 10
Please help me on following
Q1: How can we reduce the "row lock Contention" on INV_BALANCE, all possible ways & best practices?
Q2: How can we change the design to not have "row lock Contention" at all?
Appreciate your help
Thanks
Amit Garg
www.otnblogs.com

Hi Amit!
I saw you are using FOR UPDATE in your query.
If you want reduce row locks, then you not must use FOR UPDATE.
As you know, FOR UPDATE is locking rows.
Regards
Mahir M. Quluzade

How to find sql causing "enq: TX - row lock contention"

Hi,
In one of our database we keep finding "enq: TX - row lock contention" for 2-3 days. But, then it stopped. The time it happened it blocked other sessions for some long time and it got resolved automatically. Now from ADDM report we got sql queries which waited for this but, we can not find which query from which module was causing the issue. What I should look for that past information. Please help.
Database is 10gR2 on AIX.
Regards,
Gourab

moreajays wrote:
Try executing below query real time
alter session set nls_date_format='dd-mon-yyyy hh24:mi:ss';
SELECT vp.spid,c.inst_id,b.session_id sid,c.serial#,a.object_name,
a.owner object_owner,
Decode(b.locked_mode, 0, 'None',
1, 'Null (NULL)',
2, 'Row-S (SS)',
3, 'Row-X (SX)',
4, 'Share (S)',
5, 'S/Row-X (SSX)',
6, 'Exclusive (X)',
b.locked_mode) locked_mode,
b.oracle_username,
c.program,
d.event,
c.status,
c.last_call_et,
c.sql_address,
e.sql_text, c.logon_time
FROM all_objects a,
gv$locked_object b,
gv$session c,
gv$session_wait d,
gv$sqlarea e,
gv$process vp
WHERE a.object_id = b.object_id
and b.session_id=c.sid
and c.sid=d.sid and c.paddr=vp.addr
and e.address=c.sql_address and lower(d.event) like '%enq%'
ORDER BY 1;
The OP asked for a way of find a historic blocker, not a current blocker.
This query - apart from being one that no-one should want to run on a production system - doesn't say anything about the past, and doesn't identify a blocker.
It reports the sessions that are being blocked, and EVERY table that is currently locked by each session whether or not the table is involved in the current statement.
You're using the gv$ (RAC) views but haven't put in any suitable join predicates on the instance (inst_id) columns; the OP is on 10g so you don't need to join to v$session_wait to pick up the wait information; and the join to v$sqlarea forces a "full tablescan" of the library cache (child cursor derived view) because you're joining on address rather than sql_id.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis

Locking content in InDesign

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for