About multiproviders lock

Hi all,
I am new SAP-BI 7.0.I created one multiprovider with one info cube ,when ever i activate that it is giving error as multiprovider not yet locked.Please give your valuble solutions ASAP.
Suneel

Hi!
Can u explain it briefly..And how can u create a multiprovider with one info cube...just talk with basis people....

Similar Messages

About pessimistick lock in Oracle

Hello,
I have some questions about pessimistick lock in Oracle:
I know if i do a SELECT..FOR UPDATE statement, those records are locked, and just me can opperate on them.. but me - WHO? How i'm identified in Oracle? If i do a SELECT..FOR UPDATE select in an A procedure, then i call the update procedure B, how can i know that both calls belongs to the same user? If someone tries to update the same records, how the server knows if that person is allowed to make those updates or not? because everyone uses the same connection string.. isn't it?
Probably it works if i make a SELECT..FOR UPDATE and i make the effective update in that procedure, but this means that the Business Logic is in that procedure..
Please correct me if i'm wrong somewhere and clarify me.
Thanks!

By default the other session has to wait (no error message):
From SQL Reference SELECT section: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28286/statements_10002.htm#SQLRF01702
>
NOWAIT | WAIT
The NOWAIT and WAIT clauses let you tell the database how to proceed if the SELECT statement attempts to lock a row that is locked by another user.
Specify NOWAIT to return control to you immediately if a lock exists.
Specify WAIT to instruct the database to wait integer seconds for the row to become available and then return control to you.
If you specify neither WAIT nor NOWAIT, then the database waits until the row is available and then returns the results of the SELECT statement.
>
Edited by: P. Forstmann on 7 janv. 2010 09:00
Edited by: P. Forstmann on 7 janv. 2010 09:01

Is this producer-consumer scenario safe about dead-lock?

Hi friends!
I'm developing an application with a producer-consumer scenario. It produces a dead-lock 10% of times approx I execute it . I think the real reason of the crashing resides on the concurrency, because executing only the following code it gets the "main" waiting blocked during its execution after looping the do{...}while(true) sometimes. I've developed this code:
public class CubbyHole
    private int nFinishedThreads;
    private int nTotalThreads;
    public CubbyHole(int TotalThreads)
        this.nTotalThreads = nTotalThreads;
        this.nFinishedThreads = 0;
    public synchronized void put()
        this.nFinishedThreads++;
    public synchronized void get()
        while(nFinishedThreads < nTotalThreads)
            try
                wait();
            catch(InterruptedException ie){}
        notifyAll();
//import java.util.Random;
public class Producer implements Runnable
    private CubbyHole container;
    public Producer(CubbyHole container)
        this.container = container;
    public void run()
        System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " has begun");
        try{
            Random rand = new Random();
            Thread.sleep(Math.abs(rand.nextInt()*10));
        catch(InterruptedException ie){}
        System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " has finished");
        container.put();
public class Consumer implements Runnable
    private CubbyHole container;
    public Consumer(CubbyHole container)
        this.container = container;
    public void run()
        System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + "is waiting for all threads to be finished");
        container.get();
        System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + "says all threads have finished");
public class Application
    public static void main(String Args[])
        do{
            int nThreads = 2;
            CubbyHole container = new CubbyHole(nThreads);
            Thread[] ProducersArray = new Thread[nThreads];
            for(int i=0; i<nThreads; i++)
                ProducersArray=
new Thread(
new Producer(container));
ProducersArray[i].start();
Thread finalWait = new Thread( new Consumer(container));
finalWait.start();
try
finalWait.join();
catch(InterruptedException ie){}
System.out.println("Application has finished correctly");
while(true);
Please, execute it and give me your results: is the "main" waiting blocked to you?
Is this producer-consumer code safe about dead-lock?
If the answer is no... Why is it waiting blocked?
Thank you in advance.
P.D. I'm spanish, so my english is horrible! I'm sorry!

Thanks ejp:
Moreover, I suppose nothing happens if I write notifyAll() in both methods, put() and get(). In fact this matters only if the producer overwrites the memory space where data is stored, which is not my case.
Is this so?

My ex had set up a dual apple id, which i didn't know about. deleting locked items.

does this mean that every timed I synced my device he received all my stuff/ photos and things from the last year? I am concerned.
Also does it mean that he has a copy on his icloud? I had renamed my computer but his id was still there, so when I added mine it looked like
it had deleted his but somehow it didn't. I only realised when my contacts book on my mac book had his new gf number in it, which couldn't have gotten
there any other way. Also everytime I went to open address book in user settings it went to his page and at the top it said 'me'. I tried to change all the setting and stuff but figured it was just easier to set up a new user id and delete his, not sure if that was correct. Anyways I have now set up my new user id, made myself the admin and deleted his user id. however, i had moved my files from his to mine via the shared folder and then deleted the shared folder. Now I am wanting to deleted his folder from my trash but it wont. Its saying that there are 83,000 something files and it is taking an eternity, and or just stops.. I tried to delete the locked files other ways but it says i don't have permission. i contacted him and asked that he delete my files if he has them but he has not responded as yet... can someone please help me to understand how this happened or if it even did is there a way that it did? It seems like a huge breach of privacy and I am not happy about it!!!!!
any help would be really really appreciated.

Is this your machine or the company's? Machines that came with Snow Leopard or earlier installed come with system and software install disks that can be used to reisntall the iApps that came with the machine orignally.
If this is your machine and it came with Snow Leopard or earlier installed the disk will look slimialr to one of these:
If it is the company's machine see if they have the disks.
Do a custom install and then use Software Update to update iPhoto to the highest version that is available.

Question about Table Locks

Hi All,
Is there any Oracle defined table/place from where we can know the details about Tables that have been locked in the current session?
Thank you.

Hi ,
To know which all objects are locked, you can use the below query :-
COLUMN owner FORMAT A20
COLUMN username FORMAT A20
COLUMN object_owner FORMAT A20
COLUMN object_name FORMAT A30
COLUMN locked_mode FORMAT A15
SELECT b.session_id AS sid,
       NVL(b.oracle_username, '(oracle)') AS username,
       a.owner AS object_owner,
       a.object_name,
       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.os_user_name
FROM   dba_objects a,
       v$locked_object b
WHERE a.object_id = b.object_id
ORDER BY 1, 2, 3, 4;Anand

Quick question about Auto-lock settings

Hello all,
I recently was able to sync my office email account to my iPhone using Microsoft Exchance active sync. The problem as I understand from searching through different posts, is that I can no longer set my Auto-lock setting to "Never" because of this, only 5 minutes (sort of a security thing as far as I can tell).
The reason I am trying to do this is that I like to use one or two of the GPS golf apps out there, and they stay dialed in if the phone doesn't "sleep" while I am playing a round, so I would like to keep it on the entire time.
Does anyone have any ideas of how I might be able to work around this issue in any way?
Responses are, as always, much appreciated!
Cheers,
Kev

More than likely, you could not simply delete the account. The thing is that the people who came up with the security protocols already thought of that. As an employee using a company cell phone, I could delete my account, access features or information my company restricts and then readd the account, thus bypassing security protocols.
In addition, I might have other sensitive company information (in the form of contacts, documents, notes, etc) that would still be on the phone even if I delete my exchange account. Without autolock, people would still have access to this data even if I delete the account.
To prevent this type of abuse, when an exchange account is added, it installs a set of restrictions and protocols to the phone. Those protocols can, at the discretion of IT, be non alterable and non removable, even when the exchange account is deleted. This prevents people from abusing the loophole you are describing.
Similarly, simply switching to another email account will not bypass them - these protocols are now part of how your phone acts and can not be changed without wiping it back to factory settings.

Is there any known issue about mutex lock used in JNI on Solaris 10?

Dear Oracle,
I'm facing a strange behavior when running a JNI application that use the mutex lock. The application hanged after running for a while on one of our Solaris 10 machines. After investigating the stack trace of the application, it shows that one of all the application's threads that access the JNI hold the mutex lock forever, and that cause the other threads cannot access the JNI. The same application works fine on other Solaris 10 machines.
The mutex function I used as show below:
mutex_lock(&mutex)
The application hanged at this line:
0xff2cc940 ___lwp_mutex_timedlock + 0x8
The Kernel version is SunOS 5.10 Generic_142900-14
Since this issue occurrs on only one Solaris 10 machine in our environment, we are wondering if there is any known issue regarding the mutex lock used in JNI on Solaris 10. We tried to search the Internet and the Java Bug database but found nothing related to this issue.
Best regards,
Krit K.

876587 wrote:
... and that cause the other threads cannot access the JNI. The same application works fine on other Solaris 10 machines.
Different environments mean just that. So something could be causing it outside java.
Additionally if anything at all is different in the execution data, such as even a name having a different size, then it would change the execution path.
Which would cause a problem in the JNI code to manifest itself on only one box. Probably isn't a pointer bug but all sorts of odd behavior can result from that.

Problem about InfoObject locked by conversion

Hi Experts:
   Now I am doing BW Upgrade Project and one task is to check all infoobjects consistency (RSUPGRCHECK).
And one infoobject 0MATERIAL is inconsistent.
1. I have used RSD1 to repair it, but it failed
2. When I tried to activate manually, but it popup with message that it is locked by conversion.
3. I tried to use SE14 to delete /BI0/PMATERIAL data, but the option for "activate and delete data" is greyed out.
   This is my situation now, any one could give me some suggestion?
   Thank you so much,
   Louis Lu

Hi,
I RSA1, click on Tab Find, type ur IO name, then down, check on the box All Object Types. It vll show u where all u used that IO, then delete them accordingly.
or
goto T-code RSDMD, type ur IO name, and delete manually.
or
Goto T-code SLG1, In object type RSDMD, in sub object type
MD_DEL, then type ur user name, then execute.,,u vll c what all data u have loaded so far, delete what is pertaining to ur IO
try to delete the content as u are unable to perform the same with SE14... and then try repairing the same.. and perform ur steps..
Thanks

Query about SAP locks /enqueue objects

I have created an lock object for a bespoke table which has 5 key fields. For arguments sake let's call them
WERKS QMGRP QMCOD OTGRP OTEIL.
The problem I have is the following:
User 1 has a house profile that can access the following data:
WERKS QMGRP QMCOD OTGRP OTEIL
9026 HOUSE CUST
User 2 has a functional profile which gives them access to the following:
WERKS QMGRP QMCOD OTGRP OTEIL
9026 HOUSE CUST
9026 HOUSE CUST   CS    C001
9026 HOUSE CUST   CS    C002
I am building a front-end to the table to enable the users to change data associated with these keys. My problem is the following. If User 2 locks the entries,(s)he has access to first, the user 1 entry will be locked to changes, which is correct. If, however, user 1 locks its entry first, <b>all</b> of user 2's entries are locked even though only the first entry is allowed to be accessed by both. I think this is happening because the SAP lock object does not recognise '   ' '    ' as a separate value to 'CS' 'C001'. It thinks because 9026 HOUSE CUST '   ' '    ' is locked, then the other entries should be locked because they share 9026 HOUSE CUST from the key, even though there are other values in the key following 9026 HOUSE CUST.
What I want is if user 1 locks its entry first, then only the entry that matches the key totally for user 2 is locked, leaving the other 2 entries to which user 2 has access free to be edited.
Is there a way I can get the SAP lock object to recognise this eitehr by changing the enqueue function module or by the way I cal the enqueue object or not?
Any help would be appreciated.
Hope this makes sense
Larissa

Hi Larissa,
As far as I know, You cannot change generated enqueue function module. The other way as i think might work would be to create a new FM and do manipulation (for space to be changed as some other value) before calling this generated Enqueue FM.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Vicky
PS: Award points if helpful

Info about network lock

Hi all,
if I buy iPhone 4 as a gift, is it still locked on AT&T or is it never locked? Because the person I'm sending it to doesn't live in the U.S. and the mobile carrier for him is Vodafone. Thanks folks.

It depends on the country in which you buy the iphone.
ALL U.S. iphones are carrier locked to AT&T and cannot be activated with any other carrier in any other country.

About to lock a specific app on the phone

I would like to know if there is a way to make a lock on a app. Like i have the amazon app in i want it to be locked is there a way to lock a specific app?

No

Question about object lock

Hello everyone,
I want to know which method owns the lock of a specific object (some of my methods are blocked because they can not achieve the lock of a specific object, and I am wondering which method owns the lock to solve the deadlock issue). Does anyone know how to get the information?
Thanks in advance,
George

Thanks Feamar,
U should not think of a method as having a lock,
rather than that u should think of a piece of
synchronized code to have the lock on an object.
U should try and find nested synchronization
statements in your code, those are risky and can lead
to deadlocks.
Good luckYour reply is very helpful. What means "nested synchronization statement" in your reply?
regards,
George

Question about /var/lock/subsys/dbora

Hello,
I've been having a problem where ./dbora stop is not completely shutting down the database. I've done some debigging and discovered that this is because there is no /var/lock/subsys/dbora file. I've seen this file created in a lot of sample dbora scripts, ie
touch /var/lock/subsys/dbora
My question is why is this? Why does the file not get created when Oracle is started?
I'm on Oracle 10G.
thanks very much

dbstart and dbshut are oracle supplied files which we use to start and stop the database. We create a small shell script which get placed in rc.d and that file called those dbstart/shut files to start and stop oracle services at boot time. "touch /var/lock/subsys/dbora" is an extra login which WE put in our shell script and it should not have any relation with starting and stopping the services. It totally depends on the shell script written by the DBA. I have this piece of code in my startup script and I can see this file on my system but even if i can't its not going to stop working.
You first of all make sure what permission do you have on /var/lock/subsys
Daljit Singh

Q about Readwrite lock in concurrency

If I want to implement read-write data through a ReentrantReadwriteLock,
often we will use :
try {
mylock.lock();
activity...
finally{ mylock.unlock();}
but what if the real"activity" is actually done else where. Can I just make two methods SetLock() and ReleaseLock()
void SetLock(){
mylock.lock();}
void ReleaseLock(){
mylock.unlock;}
and let them called when needed

You're getting this compeltely back to front. Somewhere you have to create the lock object, store it in a variable, acquire the lock, call the method, and release the lock. The only correct way to do that is to release the lock in a 'finally' block, which implies that you have to allocate the lock in the same method so you have the lock reference. So what you are looking for is this:
try
mylock.lock();
callTheMethodThatDoesTheActivity();
finally
mylock.unlock();
}BTW this thread is in the wrong forum. The experts on concurrency are concentrated in the Concurrency forum.

About the Lock of JDBC Adapter

Hello Experts,
Im confused for the Lock.
If it will be locked when I stop the JDBC receiver channel but the insert statement doesnt complete ??
I mean whether the sql statement will be hang and not execute forward?
I presume will it possibly autocommit while I stop the sneder / receiver channel ?
THX for ur time and effort,
Brian
Edited by: brian Luo on Nov 16, 2009 11:34 AM

Hi,
It depends on your JDBC Drivers features support for your transactions, check the features of JDBC Drivers you installed on to
Adapter Engine, If you doesn't check this option also it will committ, if drivers had transaction handling features.
based on the features of drivers it will rollback the inserted records or otherwise it will committ for the inserted records.
for reference see the link below:
[http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/64/ce4e886334ec4ea7c2712e11cc567c/content.htm]

About multiproviders lock

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for