FOR UPDATE NOWAIT

Hi
Top Link supports FOR UPDATE NOWAIT with query hint query.setHint(TopLinkQueryHints.PESSIMISTIC_LOCK, PessimisticLock.LockNoWait);
but this is proprietary to Oracle and is not supported with My Sql. I am interested to know how top link behaves when we use this query hint with My Sql.
Top Link Gurus please respond. I would also like to know any pointers on how to make pessimist lock independent of databases using Top Link

Well there is a bug, we get following error
Internal Exception: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'NOWAIT' at line 1
Error Code: 1064
hint for pessimist lock with NoWait doesnt work correctly for MySql

Similar Messages

FOR UPDATE NOWAIT issue

Oracle Version: 10.2.0.5
O/S : Redhat
Hi,
I have a select statement that is wrapped in the FOR UPDATE NOWAIT clause. This is embedded in a stored procedure and this stored procedure may be called concurrently by multiple threads from a .net application.
Off late i have noticed that the proc has been returning the same value to 2 different calls - this defeats the purpose of row-level locking that FOR UPDATE NOWAIT does. I did notice that the procedure calls from the .net application where 100th of a millisecond apart.
Is there any workaround to avoid the same row being returned to different calls? or is this a known behaviour and i just have to live with it?
Edited by: brainstormer on May 6, 2013 12:56 PM

This is part of the SP that performs the lock, updates the queue table so that record is marked as In Process so it is not returned to another process when it is already In Process.
Thought it may sound far fetched, my theory is that even before session 1 completes the SELECT statement, session 2 comes in and run the select statement. Since session 1 has not completed and has not locked the row yet - oracle returns the same row to both.
Is this a possible scenario?
   PRAGMA AUTONOMOUS_TRANSACTION;
   lock_detected EXCEPTION;
   PRAGMA EXCEPTION_INIT(lock_detected, -54);
   BEGIN
        BEGIN
            SELECT q.request_id, q.process_id
                         INTO o_request_id, o_process_id
              FROM PROCESS_QUEUE q
             WHERE q.process_id IN (
                        SELECT process_id
                            FROM (
                                   SELECT l.process_id
                                     FROM PROCESS_QUEUE L, REQUESTS r
                                    WHERE L.request_id = r.request_id
                                        AND r.manifest_only = NVL(io_manifest_only,r.manifest_only)
                                        AND r.status = 'INP'
                                        AND ((l.status IN ('PND', 'RTY') AND l.host_name IS NULL AND l.instance_name IS NULL)
                                          OR (l.status = 'INP' AND l.host_name = i_host_name AND l.instance_name = i_process_name))
                                         AND retry_count < i_retry_count
                                      ORDER BY r.updated_dttm asc, l.created_dttm asc
                                    WHERE
                                        ROWNUM =1)
         FOR UPDATE NOWAIT;
         EXCEPTION
          WHEN lock_detected THEN
             NULL;
          WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND THEN
             NULL;
       END;
      UPDATE PROCESS_QUEUE
         SET status = 'INP',
             updated_dttm = sys_extract_utc(current_timestamp),
             host_name = i_host_name,
             instance_name = i_process_name
       WHERE process_id=o_process_id;
      COMMIT;
      END;

FOR UPDATE NOWAIT and ora-00054

Dears
my scenario is :-
In a busy transaction system,in a procedure i am making first lock the transaction with FOR UPDATE NOWAIT in a query.
Then I am checking some status and then i am doing the transaction.
It was ok but sometimes i am facing "ORA-00054: Resource Busy and Acquire with NOWAIT Specified" this error.
so, now how can i overcome this. or any alternative way please?
Regards
Halim
Edited by: Abdul Halim on Mar 1, 2011 1:11 PM

Abdul Halim wrote:
Dears
my scenario is :-
In a busy transaction system,in a procedure i am making first lock the transaction with FOR UPDATE NOWAIT in a query.
Then I am checking some status and then i am doing the transaction.
It was ok but sometimes i am facing "ORA-00054: Resource Busy and Acquire with NOWAIT Specified" this error.
so, now how can i overcome this. or any alternative way please?
Regards
Halim
Edited by: Abdul Halim on Mar 1, 2011 1:11 PMThis is normal behavior.So when you use SELECT FOR UPDATE statement in this case oracle will exclusive row level lock according records.And if you use NOWAIT clause in this case oracle will not wait if these records/table locked by another users.In additionally you can use without NOWAIT clause then other users will wait(without errors) also you can set limit this waiting using DISTRIBUTED_LOCK_TIMEOUT initialization parameter.

FOR UPDATE NOWAIT Fails to Detect Lock

Locking a bitmap indexed row would cause other rows locked. I heard that, if FOR UPDATE NOWAIT is used on these accidentally locked rows (Oracle SQL High Performance Turning by Prentice hall), it may not be able to detect the lock. Is it true? I cannot find related documenation from Oracle's manual. And, what should we do to prevent an incorrect lock status returned by FOR UPDATE NOWAIT?

SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT detects locks affected DATA blocks.
Look the example below:
SQL> create table t1 (id number, bit_col number);
Table created.
SQL> begin
2 insert into t1 values(0,1);
3 insert into t1 values(1,1);
4 insert into t1 values(2,2);
5 insert into t1 values(3,3);
6 insert into t1 values(4,4);
7 end;
8 /
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> create bitmap index t1_bit on t1(bit_col);
Index created.Now in session 1 we change the bitmap-indexed column and it affects
index node:
SQL> update t1
2 set bit_col = 4
3 where id = 2;
1 row updated.In accordance to bitmap index structure this operator locks the index section
the locked row pertains to:
2th session waits for the lock release even when it tries to lock another row -
two rows pertain to the same index section which is locked by the first session:
SQL> update t1
2 set bit_col = 2
3 where id = 3;After rollback in the first session the second one gets the resource:
SQL> update t1
2 set bit_col = 2
3 where id = 3;
1 row updated.Now lets do rollback in both and repeate the first UPDATE in the first session:
SQL> update t1
2 set bit_col = 4
3 where id = 2;
1 row updated.In the second session we can lock the row (not index section) using
SELECT FOR UPDATE:(in contrast with UPDATE statement which changes
indexed column):
SQL> select * from t1 where id=3 for update nowait;
ID BIT_COL
3 3But certainly we detect row-level lock in the data block for ID = 2:
SQL> select * from t1 where id=2 for update nowait;
select * from t1 where id=2 for update nowait
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specifiedRgds.

Should i use SELECT for update NOWAIT ?

Hi:
Do I need to use, in my pl/sql triggers and procedures, the SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT sentence, to avoid locks before using update table sentences ? Is it common to use it on stored procedures and triggers?
Thanks
Joao Oliveira

First, what, exactly do you mean by "avoid locks"? I was interpreting that to mean "I want to avoid creating locks in my session that might block someone else", not "I want to avoid having my SELECT wait for locks to be released-- I want it to fail immediately". If you meant the latter, then SELECT ... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT would be what you want. If you meant the former, then pessimistic locking is not what you want.
Second, what sort of Oracle Forms architecture do you have? Are you still using old-school client-server applications? Or are you using a three-tiered approach? As Tom discusses in that thread, pessimistic locking is only an option when your client application is able to maintain database state across calls (i.e. client/server systems) not when you have stateless connections (which is the norm in the three-tier model). The old client-server versions of Forms would automatically and transparently do pessimistic locking. Since you didn't mention anything about your architecture, most of us probably assumed the more common stateless client architecture (note how Tom's answers progress over the 5 years in that thread as client/server architecture became less and less common).
Third, while your question is appropriate for either the Database - General forum or the SQL and PL/SQL forum, that generally means that you are free to post it either forum, not that it should be posted in both. The vast majority of the folks that hang out in one forum hang out in the other. It's also rather frustrating to answer a post in one forum only to discover that there is another post in a different forum where someone else had already covered the same points half an hour earlier or to discover that there was additional information in another thread that might have changed your answer.
Fourth, if you are going to do pessimistic locking, that requires that you are able to maintain state across various database calls, that you are locking on the lowest possible level of granularity, and that you are able to time out sessions relatively aggressively to ensure that someone doesn't open a record, thereby locking it, go to lunch (or have their system die) and then block everyone else from working. Assuming that is the case, and that you have some reasonable way to handle the error that gets generated other than simply retrying the operation, adding NOWAIT is certainly an option. Most applications, particularly those getting written today, cannot guarantee all these things, so pessimistic locking is generally not appropriate there.
Looking at your other thread (where there is new information that would be useful in this discussion, one of the reasons that multiple threads are generally a bad idea), it seems that you have an ERP application and you are concerned about the performance of entering orders. Obviously, there shouldn't be any locking issues on the ORDER or ORDER_DETAILS tables, assuming that multiple users aren't going to be inserting the same order at the same time. The contention would almost certainly come when multiple orders are trying to update the STOCK and INVENTORY tables, since multiple orders presumably rely on the same rows in those tables. In that case, I'm not sure what adding a NOWAIT would buy you-- unless you were going to roll back the entire order because someone is updating the STOCK row for #2 pencils and your order has an item of #2 pencils, you'd have to keep retrying the operation until you were able to modify the STOCK row, which would be less efficient than just letting that update block until the row was free.
Now, you could certainly redesign the application to minimize that contention by not trying to update what I assume are aggregate tables like STOCK and INVENTORY directly as part of your OLTP processing or, at least, by minimizing the time that you're locking a row. You could, for example, make STOCK and INVENTORY materialized views rather than tables that refresh ON COMMIT, which should decrease the time that your locks are held. You could also have those tables refreshed asynchronously, which would be even more efficient but may require that you reasses your holdback requirements.
Justin

SELECT FOR UPDATE NOWAIT

Hi everyone!
I have procedure that looks like this:
procedure set_expired_users(
    p_QID   integer,
    p_Value integer default 1)
is
    l_mdate timestamp(3) := null;
begin
    l_mdate := get_mdate(p_Value);
    MERGE INTO cached_lists cl
    USING (SELECT distinct s.rootof as list_id, p_Value as is_expired, l_mdate as mdate
           FROM   zzz_userrelflat f, zzz_users u, zzz_temp_nn z, speclists s, lists_table lt
           WHERE u.grp <> 1
                  AND f.userm = u.id
                  AND lt.id = z.id
                  AND f.userg = lt.ra
                  AND z.qid = p_QID
                  AND userm <> -2
                  AND s.ruser = userm) t
    ON (cl.list_id = t.list_id)
    when matched then
      UPDATE SET cl.is_expired = t.is_expired, cl.mdate = decode(t.mdate, null, cl.mdate, t.mdate)
    when not matched then
      INSERT VALUES (t.list_id, t.is_expired, l_mdate);
end set_expired_users;As you can see there is no commit, commit executes in other stored procedures after that. in some cases I have bottleneck(enq TX), I rewrote procedure:
procedure set_expired_users(
    p_QID   integer,
    p_Value integer default 1)
is
    l_mdate timestamp(3) := null;
    busy_lock exception;
    PRAGMA exception_init(busy_lock,-54);
      cursor cur_upd is
    SELECT 1 from cached_lists cl where cl.list_id in (SELECT distinct s.rootof as list_id
           FROM   zzz_userrelflat f, zzz_users u, zzz_temp_nn z, speclists s, lists_table lt
           WHERE u.grp <> 1
                  AND f.userm = u.id
                  AND lt.id = z.id
                  AND f.userg = lt.ra
                  AND z.qid = p_QID
                  AND userm <> -2
                  AND s.ruser = userm) FOR UPDATE NOWAIT;
begin
open cur_upd;
    l_mdate := get_mdate(p_Value);
   MERGE INTO cached_lists cl
    USING (SELECT distinct s.rootof as list_id, p_Value as is_expired, l_mdate as mdate
           FROM   zzz_userrelflat f, zzz_users u, zzz_temp_nn z, speclists s, lists_table lt
           WHERE u.grp <> 1
                  AND f.userm = u.id
                  AND lt.id = z.id
                  AND f.userg = lt.ra
                  AND z.qid = p_QID
                  AND userm <> -2
                  AND s.ruser = userm) t
    ON (cl.list_id = t.list_id)
    when matched then
      UPDATE SET cl.is_expired = t.is_expired, cl.mdate = decode(t.mdate, null, cl.mdate, t.mdate)
    when not matched then
      INSERT VALUES (t.list_id, t.is_expired, l_mdate);
        close cur_upd;
      exception
when busy_lock then
    null;
end set_expired_users;Is this a good method to exclude enq TX?
Sincerely,
Pavel.

In my opinion, you shouldn't rewrite that procedure, but you should rethink (ie. streamline) the overall transaction and try to reduce the wait times between the procedure call and the commit/rollback.

Help, question about "select ... for update nowait"

There is a proc code. In the beginning of the code, I used a SQL "select ... for update nowait" in order to prevent from another proc executing at the same time. When the case happens, "-54, ORA-00054: resource busy and acquire with NOWAIT specified" will be printed in the screen.
But there is a question: I need to print sth to indicate "another proc is running". I used "if (sqlca.sqlcode == -54)" as precondition, such as:
if (sqlca.sqlcode == -54) {
printf("There is another proc running.\n");
However, this line will not be printed. I doubt that the code quits directly when using "select ... for update nowait" so as not to set value (-54) to sqlca.sqlcode.
So, could you suggest whether there is another way that I can use to print "There is another proc running" when another proc is running?
Thx a lot for your kindly reply.

Yes, that link. Scroll down a bit and you will see:
The calling application gets a PL/SQL exception, which it can process using the error-reporting functions SQLCODE and SQLERRM in an OTHERS handler. Also, it can use the pragma EXCEPTION_INIT to map specific error numbers returned by raise_application_error to exceptions of its own, as the following Pro*C example shows:
EXEC SQL EXECUTE
/* Execute embedded PL/SQL block using host
variables v_emp_id and v_amount, which were
assigned values in the host environment. */
DECLARE
null_salary EXCEPTION;
/* Map error number returned by raise_application_error
to user-defined exception. */
PRAGMA EXCEPTION_INIT(null_salary, -20101);
BEGIN
raise_salary(:v_emp_id, :v_amount);
EXCEPTION
WHEN null_salary THEN
INSERT INTO emp_audit VALUES (:v_emp_id, ...);
END;
END-EXEC;
This technique allows the calling application to handle error conditions in specific exception handlers.

Ansi SQL for "select ... for update nowait"

Hi, All,
I have a sql
select ... for update nowait
My boss wants it to be ANSI compliant.
I am not familiar with ANSI SQL.
What should be the syntax in Ansi?
Thanks a lot!

I resent having the lowest salary :-)Sorry John, it's probably due to the exchange rate of sterling against the canuck dollar right now.
SQL> select empno, ename, sal, job, mgr from emp;
     EMPNO ENAME             SAL JOB              MGR
      7369 SPENCER           800 CLERK           7902
      7499 VERREYNNE        1600 SALESMAN        7698
      7521 VAN WIJK         1250 SALESMAN        7698
      7566 MAINGUY          2975 MANAGER         7839
      7654 KISHORE          1250 SALESMAN        7698
      7698 BARRY            2850 MANAGER         7839
      7782 BOEHMER          2695 MANAGER         7839
      7788 PADFIELD         3000 ANALYST         7566
      7839 SCHNEIDER        5500 PRESIDENT
      7844 GASPAROTTO       1500 SALESMAN        7698
      7876 CAVE             1100 CLERK           7788
      7900 CLARKE            950 CLERK           7698
      7902 JAFFAR           3000 ANALYST         7566
      7934 ROBERTSON        1430 CLERK           7782
14 rows selected.
SQL> Cheers, APC

Select or Select....for update nowait (data write concurrency issue)

Hello everyone,
I am working on a jsp/servlet project now, and got questions about which is the better way to deal with concurrent writing issues.
The whole senario is described as following:
First each user is viewing his own list of several records, and each record has a hyperlink through which user can modify it. After user clicks that link, there will be a popup window pre-populated with the values of that record, then user can do the modifications. After he is done, he can either click "Save " to save the change or "Cancel" to cancel it.
Method1---This is the method I am using right now.
I did not do any special synchronization measures, so if user 1 and user2 click the link of same record, they will modify the record
at the same time, then whose updates will take effect depends on who submits the request later. If user1 submitted first, then user 2, user1
will not see his updates. I know with this method, we will have the problem of "Lost Updates", but this is the simplest and efficient way to handle this issue.
Method2--This is the method I am hesitating.
I am considering to use "Select....for update nowait " to lock a record when user1 has selected one record and intended to modify it. If user2 wanted to modify the same record, he is not allowed. ( by catching the sql exception.)But the issue I am concerned about is because the "select .. For update" action and "Update action" are not so consecutive as many transaction examples described. There could be a
big interval between " select " and "update" actions. You could not predict user's behavior, maybe after he open the popup window, it took him a while to make up his decision, or even worse, he was interrupted by other things and went away for the whole morning?.Then the lock is just held until he releases it.
And another issue is if he clicks "cancel" to cancel his work, if I use method1, I don't need to interact with server-side at all, but if user method2, I still need to interact with the server to release the lock.
Can someone give me some advice ? What do you do to deal with similar situation? If I did not make clear of the question, please let me know.
Thanks in advance !
Rachel

Hi Rachel,
Congratulation, you have found a way to overcome your programming business logic.
Have you ever consider that the solution of using CachedRowset concept yet to be included in j2se 1.5 tiger next year too prove workable under the scenario , whereby you can disconnect from the database after you have execute your query and reconnect again if you have to do transactional activity later, so that the loading overhead as well as the data pooling activity could be well balanced off.
Although rowset is still not an official API now, but its potential to me is worth consideration.
I have written a simple but crude cut JSP programme posted on this forum under the heading "Interesting CachedRowset JSP code to share " to demonstrate the concept of CachedRowset and hoping that the Java guru or the developer could provide feedback on how to imporve on the programming logic or methodology.
Thanks!!

[ORACLE 9] Select For Update Nowait - Managing the Nowait

Hi,
Our application ( Oracle E Business R11) has a Form that allows Updates.
The problem is, when a user updates a record in the form, we want to prevent another user to open the same form, to avoid locks.
So I thought that I could
a) issue a 'select ...for update nowait',
b) get a code from Oracle
c )and use this code to prevent the form to be reopened.
I tried catching the Nowait in the exception section but I cannot get it to work.
Here is my code:
declare
v_var varchar2(40) := '---';
lv_nom           tmp_delegue_jbm.del_nom%type;
begin
v_var := 'Phase 1';
select   del_nom
into     lv_nom
from     tmp_delegue_jbm
where    del_id = 3
for update of del_nom nowait;
dbms_output.put_line( 'Phase: ' || v_var );
v_var := 'Phase 2';
update tmp_delegue_jbm
set del_nom = del_nom || ' in'
where del_id = 3;
dbms_output.put_line( 'Phase: ' || v_var );
exception
   when others then -- Should deal with the nowait situation
         dbms_output.put_line( 'Error: ' || v_var || ' - ' || sqlerrm );
end;
[End Code]
Many thanks

Far easier to poke a value into memory using DBMS_APPLICATION_INFO.SET_ACTION or SET_MODULE and have any session calling the form check first to see of another session has it already opened. Just make sure your exception handlers clear the lock.
http://www.morganslibrary.org/reference/dbms_applic_info.html

Difference between FOR UPDATE NOWAIT and no FOR UPDATE NOWAIT

Hi,
I have a quick question relating to the difference in SELECT statements and the use of FOR UPDATE NOWAIT.
Example:
If I query the following
SELECT * FROM ZX_LINES WHERE APPLICATION_ID = :B4 AND ENTITY_CODE = :B3 AND EVENT_CLASS_CODE = :B2 AND TRX_ID = :B1
/ with binds parsed, the result in Autotrace is as follows:
consistent gets     87
consistent gets - examination     2
consistent gets from cache     87
However, if I query the following
SELECT * FROM ZX_LINES WHERE APPLICATION_ID = :B4 AND ENTITY_CODE = :B3 AND EVENT_CLASS_CODE = :B2 AND TRX_ID = :B1
FOR UPDATE NOWAIT
/ the results in Autotrace are:
consistent gets     4341
consistent gets - examination     2
consistent gets from cache     4341
db block changes     5894
db block gets     5920
db block gets from cache     5920
So, I'm trying to understand why it happens that a FOR UPDATE NOWAIT requires so many more consistent gets, as opposed to not using a FOR UPDATE?

>
So, I'm trying to understand why it happens that a FOR UPDATE NOWAIT requires so many more consistent gets, as opposed to not using a FOR UPDATE?
>
The main difference is that when you use FOR UPDATE Oracle has to LOCK each row.
How many rows will your query return?
Did you notice that in the second example ALL of the consistent gets were from the cache?
Did you notice all of the block gets? And that ALL of them were from the cache?

JDBC-thin on Solaris 2.7, 1002 on "FOR UPDATE NOWAIT"

Has there been a patch to allow SELECT... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT
in the jdbc thin connection layer?
I have a program which runs transactions against Oracle 7.3 or
8.05, and I'm finding that it works fine on my NT workstation
against, 7.3.4....
But when I run it against oracle 8.0.5 from a Solaris 2.7 system,
I'm getting ORA-1002 errors whenever I select for update nowait.
I'm oracle has a fix for this, but I haven't seen it yet.
I did see a message about BUG 597589 posted on 02-Sep-1998.
Was this ever fixed? The BUG database makes no mention of it.
The only work-around seems to be to set autocommit, but I suspect
that will lead to deadlocks in my application, if it even works!
Has anyone else dealt with this problem?
Thanks in advance,
Kevin Fries
null

Has there been a patch to allow SELECT... FOR UPDATE NOWAIT
in the jdbc thin connection layer?
I have a program which runs transactions against Oracle 7.3 or
8.05, and I'm finding that it works fine on my NT workstation
against, 7.3.4....
But when I run it against oracle 8.0.5 from a Solaris 2.7 system,
I'm getting ORA-1002 errors whenever I select for update nowait.
I'm oracle has a fix for this, but I haven't seen it yet.
I did see a message about BUG 597589 posted on 02-Sep-1998.
Was this ever fixed? The BUG database makes no mention of it.
The only work-around seems to be to set autocommit, but I suspect
that will lead to deadlocks in my application, if it even works!
Has anyone else dealt with this problem?
Thanks in advance,
Kevin Fries
null

For Update Nowait Query Generated Implicitly by Forms

Recently we had a problem in one form because of a query getting generated implicitly by Forms with for update and nowait clause. i.e.
Select Col1, Col2, Col3 Where Rowid= :1 for update of Col1 NoWait if we change the sequence of the Fields in block by shuffling the Fields i.e Bringing Col 1 to Col3 and Col3 to Col1 the query formed is some thing like this i.e.
Select Col3, Col2, Col1 Where Rowid= :1 for update of Col3 NoWait We just want to know when this query is getting fired and how i.e. Upon firing of which trigger in Forms this is getting fired in the DB. Because we are for sure we are not firing this query either from front end or back end. We are not locking the block any where or changing the lock mode of the block programatically.
Few block level properties relevant to this
Locking Mode - Automatic
Update Changed Columns Only - Yes
Possible reasons which we feel is that when we are assigning the values to a field programattically and when more than 1 user is navigating on the same block this may happen. Because Forms doesnt knows whether the user has edited the record manually or programatically. But we have noticed this query runs even when only 1 user is connected to this schema. This is our understanding so far any ideas/suggestions to avoid this or overcome this is appreciated.
Thanks in advance

Locking Mode - Automatic or Immediate, means select for update is issued as soon as value in a base table item changed by user or programmatically.
Setting it to "Delayed" will delay lock until commit-time.
You can override this behavior by creating ON-LOCK triger.

Ipad 2 asked for update now is on recovery mode and I just keep getting error one and it won't go off recovery mode

Ipad 2 3g and wifi asked for update. would not let me do it via the update within the ipad, so I went and do it via computer and now I am stuck on recovery mode, it won't let me get off recovery mode. I keep getting different errors.....any idea?

the ipad could not be restored. an unknown error ocurred (1)

The APP STORE app on the iPhone 4S not working correctly for UPDATES now.

It used to be, when I had APPS that needed to be updated, I would see a badge on the APP STORE icon with the number of apps that needed to be updated. Then I could tap on the icon for the APP STORE, and I would see the UPDATE button showing the badge as well. I would also see the actual apps needing updating on screen.
NOW, even though there are APPS that need updating, there is NO badge on the APP STORE icon, there is NO BADGE on the UPDATE button, and no apps will appear on screen. If I tap the UPDATE button, after a few seconds, the apps WILL appear on screen, the badge WILL appear on the UPDATE button, and, if I go to the home screen, the APP STORE icon has the badge with the number.
It is as if the apps that need updating do not automatically go to the APP STORE app anymore until I summon them by pressing the update button. This happened ever since I did an iPhone update from backup a few days ago.

try hard resetting the device, holding the power button and the home button at the same time, and reset all settings (wont delete anything) settings>general>reset>reset all settings

FOR UPDATE NOWAIT

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for