Adding default constraint causes ORA-00054: resource busy

Hi,
i ran a script and got error below. Why am i getting error "ORA-00054: resource busy" when adding a default constraint to table? On other evironments such error didn't occure, only in particualr special one the error occured.
Is it possible that table has too much traffic/locks i nthat environment? How can i rewrite my script?
Should i instal lthe script in OFFLINE mode?
In Oracle 11g, Linux Os i runned such script (in Online mode, system not offline):
ALTER TABLE Casino.Physicaltables ADD WinnerListEnabled NUMBER(1);
COMMENT ON COLUMN Casino.Physicaltables.WinnerListEnabled  IS '<BOOLEAN> Defines if winner list is turned on or off.';
ALTER TABLE Casino.Physicaltables MODIFY WinnerListEnabled DEFAULT 0;
ALTER TABLE Casino.Physicaltables MODIFY (WinnerListEnabled CONSTRAINT NC_Pts_WinnerListEnabled NOT NULL NOVALIDATE);
UPDATE Casino.Physicaltables SET WinnerListEnabled = 0 WHERE WinnerListEnabled IS NULL;
COMMIT;
ALTER TABLE Casino.Physicaltables MODIFY CONSTRAINT NC_Pts_WinnerListEnabled ENABLE VALIDATE;And output was such:
\\dserver\Live\release\12.6\0.10\sql\live_sql_12.4.0.5_to_12.6.0.10.zip
Elapsed: 00:00:00.09
ALTER TABLE Casino.Physicaltables MODIFY WinnerListEnabled DEFAULT 0
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified

Any DDL will cause an exclusive lock on the corresponding record in the dictionary. The error message indicates the object is in use by someone else.
Solutions:
1 Apply the code in a maintenance window when no one is there. DDL should NOT be run in a live system during production.
2 Put the database in restricted mode, provided no one has the restricted session privilege
3 Make sure your application uses a non-default service (ie service <> database name) and shut down that service using srvctl and/or dbms_service.
There is no such thing as 'OFFLINE mode'
Sybrand Bakker
Senior Oracle DBA

Similar Messages

  • How to find process causing "ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified"

    Hello there,
    ENV: Oracle 10gR2 64bit on ASM, RHEL 64bit
    Application team has reported "ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified" during the batch process in production env. This is happening for last couple of days. When this batch process is restarted in the morning, this error does not appear.
    I understand that this error is raised when one process tries to eecute some DDL on a table while another process is performing DML (or hasn't issued COMMIT/ROLLBACK after the DDL).
    Since this error is occurring at night (around 3:00am) during the batch process, is there a way to find out on table/object is contention happening OR which process is causing this error? The batch process cannot be modified to add debug messages because it is in Production.
    Please advise.
    Best regards

    user130038 wrote:
    Hello there,
    ENV: Oracle 10gR2 64bit on ASM, RHEL 64bit
    Application team has reported "ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified" during the batch process in production env. This is happening for last couple of days. When this batch process is restarted in the morning, this error does not appear.
    I understand that this error is raised when one process tries to eecute some DDL on a table while another process is performing DML (or hasn't issued COMMIT/ROLLBACK after the DDL).
    Since this error is occurring at night (around 3:00am) during the batch process, is there a way to find out on table/object is contention happening OR which process is causing this error? The batch process cannot be modified to add debug messages because it is in Production.
    Please advise.
    Best regards
    >The batch process cannot be modified to add debug messages because it is in Production.
    I suspect more than one job is running concurrently against the DB; otherwise not error would occur.
    Of course the batch process CAN be modified, but some PHB has decided to eliminate that option.
    The Oracle database is at the mercy of the application code.
    If the application code is poorly instrumented, then live with what exists or improved the code to facilitate isolating the bug.
    You could delay the start of one of the jobs & then hope the error no longer occurs.

  • Can't drop text index (ORA-00054: resource busy) - causes?

    Thanks, you were right! It works now, but I have another issue. I only added about 75 MB of PDFs (20 files) into my table, and indexed it. Indexing took about 4 minutes. But now, whenever I try to drop the index, I get this error:
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified
    I tried waiting an hour, and it still gives me the error - it really shouldn't be doing anything. Would a memory or storage space issue cause this? I'd appreciate any help you could give. Thanks.

    Try drop index <name> force

  • "ORA-00054 Resource Busy Error"  when running SQL*Loader in Parallel

    Hi all,
    Please help me on an issue. We are using Datastage which uses sql*loader to load data into an Oracle Table. SQL*Loader invokes 8 parallel sessions for insert on the table. When doing so, we are facing the following error intermittently:
    SQL*Loader-951: Error calling once/load initialization
    ORA-00604: error occurred at recursive SQL level 1
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specifiedSince the control file is generated automatically by datastage, we cannot modify/change the options and test. Control File for the same is:
    OPTIONS(DIRECT=TRUE, PARALLEL=TRUE, SKIP_INDEX_MAINTENANCE=YES)
    LOAD DATA INFILE 'ora.2958.371909.fifo.1' "FIX 1358"
    APPEND INTO TABLE X
    x1 POSITION(1:8) DECIMAL(15,0)  NULLIF  (1:8)  = X'0000000000000000',
    x2 POSITION(9:16) DECIMAL(15,0)  NULLIF  (9:16)  = X'0000000000000000',
    x3 POSITION(17:20) INTEGER  NULLIF  (17:20)  = X'80000000',
    IDNTFR  POSITION(21:40)   NULLIF  (21:40)  = BLANKS,
    IDNTFR_DTLS  POSITION(41:240)   NULLIF  (41:240)  = BLANKS,
    FROM_DATE  POSITION(241:259) DATE "YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS"  NULLIF  (241:259)  = BLANKS,
    TO_DATE  POSITION(260:278) DATE "YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS"  NULLIF  (260:278)  = BLANKS,
    DATA_SOURCE_LKPCD  POSITION(279:283)   NULLIF  (279:283)  = BLANKS,
    EFFECTIVE_DATE  POSITION(284:302) DATE "YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS"  NULLIF  (284:302)  = BLANKS,
    REMARK  POSITION(303:1302)   NULLIF  (303:1302)  = BLANKS,
    OPRTNL_FLAG  POSITION(1303:1303)   NULLIF  (1303:1303)  = BLANKS,
    CREATED_BY  POSITION(1304:1311) DECIMAL(15,0)  NULLIF  (1304:1311)  = X'0000000000000000',
    CREATED_DATE  POSITION(1312:1330) DATE "YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS"  NULLIF  (1312:1330)  = BLANKS,
    MODIFIED_BY  POSITION(1331:1338) DECIMAL(15,0)  NULLIF  (1331:1338)  = X'0000000000000000',
    MODIFIED_DATE  POSITION(1339:1357) DATE "YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS"  NULLIF  (1339:1357)  = BLANKS
    )- it occurs intermittently. When this job runs, no one will be accessing the database or the tables.
    - When we do not run in parallel, then we are not facing the error but it is very slow (obviously).

    Just in case, I am also attaching the Datastage Logs:
       Item #: 466
       Event ID: 1467
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:03:19
       Type: Info
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: main_program: APT configuration file: /clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Configurations/default.apt
         node "node1"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
         node "node2"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
         node "node3"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
         node "node4"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
          node "node5"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
         node "node6"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
        node "node7"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
       node "node8"
              fastname "machine_name"
              pools ""
              resource disk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Datasets" {pools ""}
              resource scratchdisk "/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch" {pools ""}
       Item #: 467
       Event ID: 1468
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:03:20
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: main_program: Warning: the value of the PWD environment variable (/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/DSEngine) does not appear to be a synonym for the current working directory (/clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Projects/Production).  The current working directory will be used, but if your ORCHESTRATE job does not start up correctly, you should set your PWD environment variable to a value that will work on all nodes of your system.
       Item #: 468
       Event ID: 1469
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:03:32
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Lkp_1: Input dataset 1 has a partitioning method other than entire specified; disabling memory sharing.
       Item #: 469
       Event ID: 1470
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:22
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Lkp_2: Input dataset 1 has a partitioning method other than entire specified; disabling memory sharing.
       Item #: 470
       Event ID: 1471
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:30
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Xfmer1: Input dataset 0 has a partitioning method other than entire specified; disabling memory sharing.
       Item #: 471
       Event ID: 1472
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:30
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Lkp_2: When checking operator: Operator of type "APT_LUTProcessOp": will partition despite the
    preserve-partitioning flag on the data set on input port 0.
       Item #: 472
       Event ID: 1473
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:30
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: SKey_1: When checking operator: A sequential operator cannot preserve the partitioning
    of the parallel data set on input port 0.
       Item #: 473
       Event ID: 1474
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:30
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: SKey_2: When checking operator: Operator of type "APT_GeneratorOperator": will partition despite the
    preserve-partitioning flag on the data set on input port 0.
       Item #: 474
       Event ID: 1475
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:30
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: buffer(1): When checking operator: Operator of type "APT_BufferOperator": will partition despite the
    preserve-partitioning flag on the data set on input port 0.
       Item #: 475
       Event ID: 1476
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:30
       Type: Info
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member: When checking operator: The -index rebuild option has been included; in order for this option to be
    applicable and to work properly, the environment variable APT_ORACLE_LOAD_OPTIONS should contain the options
    DIRECT and PARALLEL set to TRUE, and the option SKIP_INDEX_MAINTENANCE set to YES;
    this variable has been set by the user to `OPTIONS(DIRECT=TRUE, PARALLEL=TRUE, SKIP_INDEX_MAINTENANCE=YES)'.
       Item #: 476
       Event ID: 1477
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:35
       Type: Info
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr: When checking operator: The -index rebuild option has been included; in order for this option to be
    applicable and to work properly, the environment variable APT_ORACLE_LOAD_OPTIONS should contain the options
    DIRECT and PARALLEL set to TRUE, and the option SKIP_INDEX_MAINTENANCE set to YES;
    this variable has been set by the user to `OPTIONS(DIRECT=TRUE, PARALLEL=TRUE, SKIP_INDEX_MAINTENANCE=YES)'.
       Item #: 477
       Event ID: 1478
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Lkp_2,6: Ignoring duplicate entry at table record 1; no further warnings will be issued for this table
       Item #: 478
       Event ID: 1479
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,0: SQL*Loader-951: Error calling once/load initialization
       Item #: 479
       Event ID: 1480
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,0: ORA-00604: error occurred at recursive SQL level 1
       Item #: 480
       Event ID: 1481
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,0: ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified
       Item #: 481
       Event ID: 1482
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,6: SQL*Loader-951: Error calling once/load initialization
       Item #: 482
       Event ID: 1483
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,6: ORA-00604: error occurred at recursive SQL level 1
       Item #: 483
       Event ID: 1484
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Warning
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,6: ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified
       Item #: 484
       Event ID: 1485
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Fatal
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,6: The call to sqlldr failed; the return code = 256;
    please see the loader logfile: /clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch/ora.23335.478434.6.log for details.
       Item #: 485
       Event ID: 1486
       Timestamp: 2009-06-02 23:04:41
       Type: Fatal
       User Name: dsadm
       Message: Tgt_member_idtfr,0: The call to sqlldr failed; the return code = 256;
    please see the loader logfile: /clu01/datastage/Ascential/DataStage/Scratch/ora.23335.478434.0.log for details.

  • ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified

    We are frequently getting ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified error in production database for a application user group. Production database is oracle 10g R 10.2.0.5.0 on sun solaris. The app user group is telling that the code is not changed from many years. They wants this to be resolved on h.priority. The tables which are getting this error has clob fields. I rebuilded indexes in QA environment & they ran it again they are getting the same error.
    I asked to see select for update nowait clause's carefully. They said everything is fine. Please let me know any solution if any one is getting this kind of error. Thanks.

    Has anything changed compared to previously when these errors didn't happen?
    Not necessarily application code but
    - Database version
    - patches
    - indexes
    - data volumes
    - number of clients
    etc, etc
    What led you to rebuild the indexes?
    As for suggested solutions, they completely depend on the specifics of your situation.
    Do you know that the SELECT FOR UPDATE is raising the ORA-00054?
    Something else has the relevant resource locked in a non-shareable way - you need to find out what.
    It sounds like the most likely candidate is another session that has issued a SELECT FOR UPDATE and locked some of the same row(s).
    It's good that you can reproduce on QA rather than just production.
    Maybe you can manually issue the failing SELECT FOR UPDATE statement but with WAIT rather than NOWAIT and see if that helps you figure out blockers, etc.
    Further analysis required at your end.

  • Sqlldr direct got ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specifie

    I have multi-threaded application to kick off multiple sqlldr sessions that will try to insert 200K rows of data into same table from each session. I am using direct path with parallel enabled. The target table has no index, not even a PK, but I got this ORA-00054 error.
    Sample control file template:
    OPTIONS (SKIP=1, DIRECT=TRUE, PARALLEL=TRUE, SILENT=ALL, MULTITHREADING=TRUE, SKIP_INDEX_MAINTENANCE=TRUE, SKIP_UNUSABLE_INDEXES=TRUE)
    UNRECOVERABLE
    LOAD DATA
    INFILE '&DATA_FILE_NAME'
    BADFILE '&BAD_FILE_NAME'
    DISCARDFILE '&DISCARD_FILE_NAME'
    INTO TABLE TARGET_TABLE
    APPEND
    FIELDS TERMINATED BY "," OPTIONALLY ENCLOSED BY '"' TRAILING NULLCOLS
    ( SESSION_ID CONSTANT &SESSION_ID,
    FIELD00,
    FIELD01,
    FIELD02,
    FIELD03,
    FIELD04,
    FIELD05,
    FIELD06
    The definition of TARGET_TABLE:
    CREATE TABLE TARGET_TABLE
    SESSION_ID NUMBER(12),
    FIELD00 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD01 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD02 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD03 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD04 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD05 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD06 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD07 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD08 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD09 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD10 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE),
    FIELD11 VARCHAR2(4000 BYTE)
    I want to WAIT if there's any race. How can I make it WAIT? Most of the time, WAIT should be the default, but somehow, it acts differently here.
    Any help will be highly appreciated.

    Looking at the same manual, you can see here that you need exclusive access to the table:
    http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14215/ldr_modes.htm#sthref1449
    And here, you can see that if other DML is happening on a table, Oracle says you need to do conventional path load:
    http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14215/ldr_modes.htm#sthref1432
    In the case of parallelization, yes, you must set parallel=true. This allows SQL*Loader to manage the parallel inserts. If you were to try to do multiple, concurrent direct path loads yourself by running multiple instances of SQL*Loader, you'd run into the same TM enqueue problem.
    The question as to why the TM enqueue is taken in exclusive mode, has to do with how direct path load works. Oracle loads data into previously unformatted, completely empty data blocks from above the HWM. When the load is complete, the HWM is adjusted, and the data is available. Well, Oracle can't allow for multiple concurrent direct loads, all allocating space from above the HWM, and all messing w/ the HWM. This would cause a bit of a problem. And really, you don't want non-direct load DML going on either. So, Oracle disallows it, by taking the TM enqueue in exclusive mode. (Normal DML, non-direct load, takes the TM enqueue in a sharable mode, allowing for other concurrent DML.)
    Hope that's clear,
    -Mark
    Message was edited by:
    Mark J. Bobak

  • How can I enable a constraint even ORA-00054

    Dear,
    ALTER TABLE CLC_TRM_DTS_ATRBT
    MODIFY CONSTRAINT CLC_TRM_DTS_ATRBT_02_FK ENABLE;
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified or timeout expired.
    Any way to enable the constraint even any uncommited session or locked?
    Regards

    It is possible, for a busy database, that you will NEVER get the lock you need to enable the constraint. Just because one transaction finishes does not mean that another has not already started. Even a loop as Mr Chitale suggests may never succeed.
    The answer is to quiesce the database with ALTER SYSTEM QUIESCE RESTRICTED. It will hang until all active sessions have committed while preventing inactive sessions from waking up. Then kick off your ENABLE command, and in another session UNQUIESCE. This can be very quick, and your users may not even notice: their sessions will just appear to hang for a couple of seconds.
    John Watson
    Oracle Certified Master DBA

  • How  to solve ora-00054 error while drop the constraint

    i am trying to drop the constraint for the table but it will give the below error.
    ora-00054 resource busy and acquire.
    can you please tell me solve this problem. but in my pc i am not using that table at any where in the system.
    ALTER TABLE EIIS_JBWSTOCK
    DROP CONSTRAINT CHK_TRAN_JOB_TYPE;
    this is my code for alter table constraint.
    thanks

    You may find <sid, serial#> and kill the session.
    SELECT c.owner,
           c.object_name,
           c.object_type,
           b.SID,
           b.serial#,
           b.status,
           b.osuser,
           b.machine
      FROM v$locked_object a, v$session b, dba_objects c
    WHERE b.SID = a.session_id AND a.object_id = c.object_id; --You may add extra condition for your table.
    ALTER SYSTEM KILL SESSION '<sid, serial#>'

  • Resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT exception

    Dears frnds,
    I have faced this exception many times.But unable find out the Root cause of this exception.If anyone suggest why this exception arise,it will help to avoid this
    Exception
    java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified ORA-06512: a

    It's somewhat hard to offer suggestions without understanding what the procedure is doing.
    Normally, an INSERT or an UPDATE will block indefinitely waiting to lock the row(s) in question. The error you are getting generally requires that you are doing an explicit SELECT ... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT or DDL. Doing DDL in an OLTP application is a bad idea, so you'd want to figure out what problem you're trying to solve and find a way to solve the problem without DDL. If you are doing an explicit SELECT ... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT, you'll need to understand why NOWAIT is being specified and figure out whether you should be handling the error. If someone added a SELECT ... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT because they don't want users to block waiting for access to a row, it may be perfectly reasonable to return this exception.
    Justin

  • JBO-26030 and ORA-00054 error when updating a certain row

    I have a page that saves data when you leave a cell in a table. Everything seems to work fine, but when you get to some cells the JBO-26030 error pops up and then no matter what you do you can't ever save anything on that cell. You can close everything down and reopen and change other cells, but when you go back to that cell the error message always pops up. I think it's mainly happening on the cell that is a drop down with 3 values (P, F, and NT). P is the value and key for the drop down.
    Then when I go into the database through Toad I try to change the value just so see what happens and that's when I get the ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified error. This again only happens when editing that row.
    Any help is appreciated...Thanks!
    Edited by: user10942416 on Aug 6, 2009 6:16 AM

    This error is caused when the block property 'DML returning values' equals YES. This property was introduced as of forms 6. What does it do ? As per the on-line help of Forms, "A database update or insert action may initiate server-side triggers that cause alterations or additional changes in the data. In Release 6, when using an Oracle8 database server, Forms uses the DML Returning clause to immediately bring back any such changes. When this property is set to Yes, Forms will automatically update the client-side version of the data, and the user will not need to re-query the database to obtain the changed values". When this property is switched to yes the generated insert/update statement will contain the 'returning clause' and this clause is causing the error.
    As far as I have tested, the only way at present, to get rid of this error is to set 'DML returing values' to NO. So, not to use this functionality.
    See also:
    http://support.oracle.co.uk/metalink/plsql/ml2_documents.showFrameDocument?p_database_id=NOT&p_id=143395.1
    Please respond if this solution works for you.
    Greets,
    Guido Zeelen

  • Getting ORA-00054

    Our application is getting the following error...
    SQL> select * from cmd where CC0034_CMD_NRI = 111 for update nowait;
    select * from cmd where CC0034_CMD_NRI = 111 for update nowait
    ERROR at line 1:
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified
    My understanding is that the requested record is locked and that the "FOR UPDATE NOWAIT" clause causes the error. How do I find out who locked the record ?
    How do I prevent this from happening again, or is retrying until the locked record is free the only option I have ?
    Thanks,
    Gabriel

    Yes this error comes from that some other users were holding a lock on a table.
    Example below will demonstrate this:
    Session one:
    [email protected]> create table t(id int);
    Table created.
    [email protected]> insert into t values(10);
    1 row created.
    [email protected]> lock table t in exclusive mode;
    Table(s) Locked.
    Session two:
    [email protected]> select * from t for update nowait;
    select * from t for update nowait
    ERROR at line 1:
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified
    [email protected]> select * from t for update ;
    still wating..........
    You can peform this check:
    [email protected]> select * from dba_blockers;
    HOLDING_SESSION
    11
    to get sid of the blocking sessions and then using v$ views you can check sid, serial#, sql statetment being executed and so on..
    Best Regards
    Krystian Zieja / mob

  • ORA-00054 error help

    SQL> drop table worker_hourly
    ERROR at line 1:
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified or timeout expired
    create table worker_hourly
    ( wrk_id       number(3),
      wrk_perhr    number(5,2) NOT NULL,
      wrk_otrate   number(3,2),
        primary key (wrk_id),
        constraint workerexist foreign key (wrk_id)
            references worker_super(wrk_id),
        constraint validot check (wrk_otrate < 2.5))
    insert into worker_hourly values (333,19.75,NULL)
    insert into worker_hourly values (444,15.45,1.5)
    /im trying to drop this table and start it up again but its showing up that error, how can i fix it, i've never encountered it before

    Either you're not giving the full picture here, or you missed:
    (issued from the session that has an outstanding transaction on your table) So:
    -Are you capable of indentifying sessions that lock 'your' table? (Any tool available?)
    -Do you have a DBA around you can ask?
    -Database version?
    -acces to datadictionary views like V$LOCK amnd V$LOCKED_OBJECT
    -is this a development or a production problem? (I think it's a development problem)
    any other suggestions???Give the full picture here, instead of letting us 'fire guesses at you'.
    That's like walking down 'Cumbersome Avenue'.

  • ORA-01591 and ORA-00054 while creating index

    Hi guys,
    there is a situation that I didnt understand.
    I have table and want to create an index on it but when I try to create an index I got one of
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified or timeout expired
    or
    ORA-01591: lock held by in-doubt distributed transaction 11.13.689049 errors.
    as I know there is and .net application which has connection pooling and while this web services were active, I can not create index.
    first thing that i did is querying V$LOCK table and i saw some TM locks from time to time and sometimes nothing. when there wasn't any locks on the table I try to create index, system wait for a while (1 minutes approximately) then I got "ORA-01591: lock held by in-doubt distributed ..." error again. (even "Application" wait event occured. in enterprise manager I saw a few red sql command which is waiting for my create index command)
    after a quick search, I use PENDING_TRANS$ and PENDING_SESSIONS$ tables to force rollback to the transaction which is indicated on ORA-01591 error but just after I rollback that transaction, a new one come up every time.
    today I use something else. First I locked table manually in EXCLUSIVE mode (and success it). then I try to create index again, command worked for a while and I got ORA-01591 error again.
    any idea why is this happining and how can i create my index ?

    sybrand_b,
    when i run
    Lock Table MyTable in exclusive mode;command, it succeeded. I can lock the table if you mean that or if you are saying even if that command runs very well, because of in doubt transaction, oracle will take the lock back, that could be. but as i said lock table command succeeded.
    and there is an another situation here, there is no any other database ? I mean, how could an in doubt transaction happen. there are dblinks but they do not even query that table.
    there is just something that i dont know. as i said in my first message, a .net application is running on an aplication server, as far as i know there connection pooling etc on that server. is this can cause that kind of in doubt transaction ?
    PS: every time in ora-01591 error, I got the same transaction id and that transaction id is not in dba_2pc_pending or pending_session$ etc. that might help.
    Edited by: Mustafa KALAYCI on 17.Şub.2012 13:48

  • Errors: ORA-00054 & ORA-01452 while running DAC Full Load

    Hi Friends,
    Previously, I ran full load...it went well. And, I did some sample reports also in BI APPS 7.9.6.2
    Now, I modified few parameters as per the Business and I try to run Full Load again...But I struck with few similar errors. I cleared couple of DB Errors.
    Please, help me out to solve the below errors.
    1. ANOMALY INFO::: Error while executing : TRUNCATE TABLE:W_SALES_BOOKING_LINE_F
    MESSAGE:::com.siebel.etl.database.IllegalSQLQueryException: DataWarehouse:TRUNCATE TABLE W_SALES_BOOKING_LINE_F
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified or timeout expired
    --I checked W_SALES_BOOKING_LINE_F, it contain s data.
    2. ANOMALY INFO::: Error while executing : CREATE INDEX:W_GL_REVN_F:W_GL_REVN_F_U1
    MESSAGE:::java.lang.Exception: Error while execution : CREATE UNIQUE INDEX
         W_GL_REVN_F_U1
    ON
         W_GL_REVN_F
         INTEGRATION_ID ASC
         ,DATASOURCE_NUM_ID ASC
    NOLOGGING
    with error DataWarehouse:CREATE UNIQUE INDEX
         W_GL_REVN_F_U1
    ON
         W_GL_REVN_F
         INTEGRATION_ID ASC
         ,DATASOURCE_NUM_ID ASC
    NOLOGGING
    ORA-01452: cannot CREATE UNIQUE INDEX; duplicate keys found
    -- Yes, I found duplicate values in this table W_GL_REVN_F. But, how can I rectify it. I did some engineering, but failed.
    please tell me the steps to acheive....
    Thanks in advance..
    Stone

    Hi, Please see the answers (in bold) below.
    1. ANOMALY INFO::: Error while executing : TRUNCATE TABLE:W_SALES_BOOKING_LINE_F
    MESSAGE:::com.siebel.etl.database.IllegalSQLQueryException: DataWarehouse:TRUNCATE TABLE W_SALES_BOOKING_LINE_F
    ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified or timeout expired
    --I checked W_SALES_BOOKING_LINE_F, it contain s data.
    Just restart the load, It seems like your DB processes are busy and the table still has a  lock on it which means something is not yet Commited/Rolled Back.
    If this issue repeats you can mail your DBA and ask him to look in to the issue
    2. ANOMALY INFO::: Error while executing : CREATE INDEX:W_GL_REVN_F:W_GL_REVN_F_U1
    MESSAGE:::java.lang.Exception: Error while execution : CREATE UNIQUE INDEX
    W_GL_REVN_F_U1
    ON
    W_GL_REVN_F
    INTEGRATION_ID ASC
         ,DATASOURCE_NUM_ID ASC
         NOLOGGING
         with error DataWarehouse:CREATE UNIQUE INDEX
         W_GL_REVN_F_U1
         ON
         W_GL_REVN_F
         INTEGRATION_ID ASC
         ,DATASOURCE_NUM_ID ASC
         NOLOGGING
         ORA-01452: cannot CREATE UNIQUE INDEX; duplicate keys found
         -- Yes, I found duplicate values in this table W_GL_REVN_F. But, how can I rectify it. I did some engineering, but failed.
         please tell me the steps to achieve....
    please execute this sql and get the duplicate values. If the count is less you can delete the records based on ROW_WID
    How  many duplicates do you have in total?
    *1. SELECT INTEGRATION_ID,DATASOURCE_NUM_ID,count(*) FROM W_GL_REVN_F*
    GROUP BY INTEGRATION_ID, DATASOURCE_NUM_ID
    HAVING COUNT()>1*
    *2. SELECT ROW_WID,DATASOURCE_NUM_ID,INTEGRATION_ID FROM W_GL_REVN_F*
    WHERE INTEGRATION_ID= (from 1st query)
    *3. DELETE from W_GL_REVN_F where ROW_WID=( from 2nd query)*
    Hope this helps !!

  • ORA-00054 error when loading Oracle table using Data Services

    Hello,
    we are facing ORA-00054 error when loading Oracle table using BO Data services
    (Oracle 10g database, BODS Xi 3.2 SP3)
    Test Job performs
    1- truncate table
    2- load table (tested in standard and bulk load modes)
    Scenario when issue happens is:
    1- Run loading Job
    2- Job end in error for any Oracle data base error
    3- When re-running the same Job, Job fails with following error
         ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified
    It seems after first failure, Oracle session for loading the table stays active and locks the table.
    To be able to rerun the Job, we are forced need to kill Oracle session manually to be able to run the Job again.
    Expected behaviour would be : on error rollback modifications made on table and BODS stops Oracle session in a clean way.
    Can somebody tell me / or point me to any BODS best practice about Oracle error handling to prevent such case?
    Thanks in advance
    Paul-Marie

    the ora-0054 can occure depending how the job failed before. If this occures you will need the DBA to release the lock on the table in question
    Or
           AL_Engine.exe on The server it creates the Lock. Need to Kill Them. Or stop it..
    This Problem Occurs when we select The Bulkloading Option in orclae  We also faced the same issue,Our admin has Killed the session. Then everything alright.

Maybe you are looking for