JDBC Lock Table

I am developing two java programs that are accessing an Oracle database using JDBC. The two programs are to access to same table simultaneously.
Is there a way I can use an sql LOCK TABLE command to lock a table while one program is writing to the table, and have the other program check for this Lock, and only proceed with updates on that table if the table is not locked? Would I need to have seperate database login IDs to accomplish this?
For example:
Program 1
stmt.executeUpdate("LOCK TABLE A");
//insert some records
con.commit();
Program 2
While ( TABLE A IS LOCKED)
//wait
Update table A

In future JDBC questions should be posted into the JDBC forum.
Whatever you are doing don't. Just use transactions. Figure out what kinds of transaction serialization your setup supports too.

Similar Messages

MySQL lock table size Exception

Hi,
Our users get random error pages from vibe/tomcat (Error 500).
If the user tries it again, it works without an error.
here are some errors from catalina.out:
Code:
2013-07-31 06:23:12,225 WARN [http-8080-8] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:23:12,225 ERROR [http-8080-8] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:23:12,242 WARN [http-8080-8] [org.kablink.teaming.web.portlet.handler.LogContextInfoInterceptor] - Action request URL [http://vibe.*******.ch/ssf/a/do?p_name=ss_forum&p_action=1&entryType=4028828f3f0ed66d013f0f3ff208013d&binderId=2333&action=add_folder_entry&vibeonprem_url=1] for user [kablink,ro]
2013-07-31 06:23:12,245 WARN [http-8080-8] [org.kablink.teaming.spring.web.portlet.DispatcherPortlet] - Handler execution resulted in exception - forwarding to resolved error view
org.springframework.dao.InvalidDataAccessApiUsageException: object references an unsaved transient instance - save the transient instance before flushing: org.kablink.teaming.domain.FolderEntry; nested exception is org.hibernate.TransientObjectException: object references an unsaved transient instance - save the transient instance before flushing: org.kablink.teaming.domain.FolderEntry
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.SessionFactoryUtils.convertHibernateAccessException(SessionFactoryUtils.java:654)
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateAccessor.convertHibernateAccessException(HibernateAccessor.java:412)
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTemplate.doExecute(HibernateTemplate.java:411)
2013-07-31 06:23:36,474 ERROR [Sitescape_QuartzSchedulerThread] [org.quartz.core.ErrorLogger] - An error occured while scanning for the next trigger to fire.
org.quartz.JobPersistenceException: Couldn't acquire next trigger: The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size [See nested exception: java.sql.SQLException: The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size]
at org.quartz.impl.jdbcjobstore.JobStoreSupport.acquireNextTrigger(JobStoreSupport.java:2794)
at org.quartz.impl.jdbcjobstore.JobStoreSupport$36.execute(JobStoreSupport.java:2737)
at org.quartz.impl.jdbcjobstore.JobStoreSupport.executeInNonManagedTXLock(JobStoreSupport.java:3768)
at org.quartz.impl.jdbcjobstore.JobStoreSupport.acquireNextTrigger(JobStoreSupport.java:2733)
at org.quartz.core.QuartzSchedulerThread.run(QuartzSchedulerThread.java:264)
Caused by: java.sql.SQLException: The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
at com.mysql.jdbc.SQLError.createSQLException(SQLError.java:946)
at com.mysql.jdbc.MysqlIO.checkErrorPacket(MysqlIO.java:2870)
at com.mysql.jdbc.MysqlIO.sendCommand(MysqlIO.java:1573)
at com.mysql.jdbc.ServerPreparedStatement.serverExecute(ServerPreparedStatement.java:1169)
2013-07-31 06:27:12,463 WARN [Sitescape_Worker-8] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:27:12,463 ERROR [Sitescape_Worker-8] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:27:12,463 ERROR [Sitescape_Worker-8] [org.jbpm.graph.def.GraphElement] - action threw exception: Hibernate operation: could not execute update query; uncategorized SQLException for SQL [update SS_ChangeLogs set owningBinderKey=?, owningBinderId=? where (entityId in (? , ?)) and entityType=?]; SQL state [HY000]; error code [1206]; The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size; nested exception is java.sql.SQLException: The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
org.springframework.jdbc.UncategorizedSQLException: Hibernate operation: could not execute update query; uncategorized SQLException for SQL [update SS_ChangeLogs set owningBinderKey=?, owningBinderId=? where (entityId in (? , ?)) and entityType=?]; SQL state [HY000]; error code [1206]; The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size; nested exception is java.sql.SQLException: The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
at org.springframework.jdbc.support.AbstractFallbackSQLExceptionTranslator.translate(AbstractFallbackSQLExceptionTranslator.java:83)
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateAccessor.convertJdbcAccessException(HibernateAccessor.java:424)
2013-07-31 06:27:22,393 INFO [CT-kablink] [org.kablink.teaming.lucene.LuceneProvider] - (kablink) Committed, firstOpTimeSinceLastCommit=1375251142310, numberOfOpsSinceLastCommit=12. It took 82.62174 milliseconds
2013-07-31 06:28:22,686 INFO [Sitescape_Worker-9] [org.kablink.teaming.jobs.CleanupJobListener] - Removing job send-email.sendMail-1375252102500
2013-07-31 06:29:51,309 INFO [Sitescape_Worker-10] [org.kablink.teaming.jobs.CleanupJobListener] - Removing job send-email.sendMail-1375252191099
2013-07-31 06:32:08,820 WARN [http-8080-2] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:32:08,820 ERROR [http-8080-2] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:32:10,775 WARN [http-8080-1] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:32:10,775 ERROR [http-8080-1] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:32:12,305 WARN [http-8080-1] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:32:12,305 ERROR [http-8080-1] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:32:14,605 WARN [http-8080-3] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:32:14,606 ERROR [http-8080-3] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:32:16,056 WARN [http-8080-3] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:32:16,056 ERROR [http-8080-3] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:32:24,166 WARN [http-8080-1] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - SQL Error: 1206, SQLState: HY000
2013-07-31 06:32:24,166 ERROR [http-8080-1] [org.hibernate.util.JDBCExceptionReporter] - The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
2013-07-31 06:32:24,167 WARN [http-8080-1] [org.kablink.teaming.spring.web.portlet.DispatcherPortlet] - Handler execution resulted in exception - forwarding to resolved error view
org.springframework.jdbc.UncategorizedSQLException: Hibernate flushing: could not insert: [org.kablink.teaming.domain.AuditTrail]; uncategorized SQLException for SQL [insert into SS_AuditTrail (zoneId, startDate, startBy, endBy, endDate, entityType, entityId, owningBinderId, owningBinderKey, description, transactionType, fileId, applicationId, deletedFolderEntryFamily, type, id) values (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, 'A', ?)]; SQL state [HY000]; error code [1206]; The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size; nested exception is java.sql.SQLException: The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size
at org.springframework.jdbc.support.AbstractFallbackSQLExceptionTranslator.translate(AbstractFallbackSQLExceptionTranslator.java:83)
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTransactionManager.convertJdbcAccessException(HibernateTransactionManager.java:805)
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTransactionManager.convertHibernateAccessException(HibernateTransactionManager.java:791)
at org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTransactionManager.doCommit(HibernateTransactionManager.java:664)
It always logs the Mysql error code 1206:
MySQL :: MySQL 5.4 Reference Manual :: 13.6.12.1 InnoDB Error Codes
1206 (ER_LOCK_TABLE_FULL)
The total number of locks exceeds the lock table size. To avoid this error, increase the value of innodb_buffer_pool_size.
The value of innodb_buffer_pool_size is set to 8388608 (8MB) on my server.
In the documentation (MySQL :: MySQL 5.4 Reference Manual :: 13.6.3 InnoDB Startup Options and System Variables) it says that the default is 128MB.
Can i set the value to 134217728 (128MB) or will this cause other problems? Will this setting solve my problem?
Thanks for your help.

I already found an entry from Kablink:
https://kablink.org/ssf/a/c/p_name/s...beonprem_url/1
But i think this can't be a permanent solution...
Our MySQL Server version is 5.0.95 running on sles11

Few lock table questions ...

I have an app with Java + Oracle. I have a few tables which can be modified ( select, insert, up, del) by more than one user.
For ex
//---------- get info from database
SELECT a FROM A;
// later
SELECT b FROM B;
// --------- end
Q1). how can I make sure that after I select from A, no one modifies table B, until I select from B ?
Q2). If I have 3 tables and I have to insert some values, in all of them, how should I do this ? ( lock tables, put the insert * 3 into an transaction, release locks)
Q3). I know that jdbc-odbc isn't very good, but still, can I use it ?

Q1). how can I make sure that after I select from A,
no one modifies table B, until I select from B ?No one modifies table B in any way at all? While the user goes for a coffee break? Why would you want that?
Q2). If I have 3 tables and I have to insert some
values, in all of them, how should I do this ? ( lock
tables, put the insert * 3 into an transaction,
release locks)Just insert the records. You can put the three inserts in a transaction, if you need that, but there's no point in preventing other users from accessing the tables while you do that.
Database applications that use Oracle or other databases designed for large numbers of users rarely lock tables. If your design leads you into a place where you have to lock tables then you probably need to go back and fix your design so that it supports multiple users in a normal way.
Q3). I know that jdbc-odbc isn't very good, but
still, can I use it ?Sure. But Oracle comes with its own JDBC drivers so you don't need to.

Help needed with locking tables+Mysql

Hello!
I have a table "A" which is of kind "auto_increament" (field "A1")
When I do an insert in A I need to know the next "auto_increament" index because I have to encrypt that index into another field in A lets say this field is called A2.
I understand that I have to do like like I do below (the semantic syntax) but I dont know the java syntax for locking tables and getting the next "auto_increament" index. The "lock type" of the ttable should be so now one else can write to the table.
--------semantic syntax---------------
1) LOCK A
2) Get "next" index from A
3) Make an insert
4) UNLOCK A
Very greatful for help!
Regards/D_S

http://www.mysql.com/search/?q=jdbc+autoincrement&base=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.mysql.com&lang=en&doc=0&m=a

Lock tables when load data

Are there any way to lock tables when i insert data with SQL*Loader? or oracle do it for me automatically??
how can i do this?
Thanks a lot for your help

Are there any problem if in the middle of my load (and commits) an user update o query data ?The only problem that I see is that you may run short of undo space (rollback segment space) if your undo space is limited and the user is running a long SELECT query for example: but this problem would only trigger ORA-1555 for the SELECT query or (less likely since you have several COMMIT) ORA-16XX because load transaction would not find enough undo space.
Data is not visible to other sessions, unless, the session which is loading data, commits it. That's the way Oracle handle the read committed isolation level for transaction.
See http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B10501_01/server.920/a96524/c21cnsis.htm#2689
Or what happens if when i want to insert data someone has busy the table?You will get blocked if you try to insert data that has the same primary key as a row being inserted by a concurrent transaction.

System error: Unable to lock table/view V_T077K_M

Hi,
Not able to work on field selection (OMSG) i am getting an error "System error: Unable to lock table/view V_T077K_M" checked in SM 12 also, but dint get there anything.
please cud you help me in this regard,

contact your basis team, there might be an overflow of the lock table because of mass changes from other users (even for other tables)

Timeout when inserting row in a locked table

How can I set the timeout before an INSERT statement fails with error ORA-02049 (timeout: distributed transaction waiting for lock) when the entire table has been lock with LOCK TABLE .
Documentation says to modify DISTRIBUTED_LOCK_TIMEOUT parameter, but it is obsolete in Oracle 8i.
Any idea ???

You could set an alarm() in a signal. Then on return (for whatever reason) you clear the alarm, inspect the return code of the sql execute call and determine what happened (i.e. did the transaction completed or did the alarm get you).
Hope it helps.
-Lou
[email protected]
How can I set the timeout before an INSERT statement fails with error ORA-02049 (timeout: distributed transaction waiting for lock) when the entire table has been lock with LOCK TABLE .
Documentation says to modify DISTRIBUTED_LOCK_TIMEOUT parameter, but it is obsolete in Oracle 8i.
Any idea ???

IDOC Receiver Adapter, getting Lock Table Overflow to CRM System

Hello SDN!!!
This scenario is for PI to process a file and send to CRM via IDOC. The IDOCu2019s are only being created and not processed until later.
Problem: I am getting a Lock Table Overflow error in method IDOC_INBOUND_ASYNCHRONOUS via sm58 in PI which points to the CRM box.
I have been searching many forums and every solution seems to indicate increasing the lock table, the problem with that solution is we are currently trying to create (not process yet) 80000 IDOCu2019s. This would allocate too much for the lock table.
So my question is this, Shouldnu2019t the lock be released when the IDOC gets created or none the less when a packet of IDOCu2019s via content management (breaking up the file in 1000 increments) finish. The lock table in CRM keeps increasing until all rows from the file, sent via IDOC adapter in 80 messages with 1000 IDOCu2019s per messagein the table are complete (80 separate messages in sxmb_moni).
Background:
IDOC was imported, changed to include unbounded and reimported.
Content Management breaks the file into 80 different segments, thus creating 80 distinct mappings with distinct MessageIdu2019s.
80 IDOC packets are sent to CRM, via IDOC adapter and sm58.
TCODE sm12 in CRM shows the table to keep growing and locks not released until full message is complete.
Any help would be appreciated
Cheers
Devlin

The only way to process the IDOCs in this case is by increasing the "enque/table_size" parameter in order to create the required IDOCs. You can increase the value for this parameter up to 102400 (beyond that can cause performance issues). Since you need to handle 80000, this shouldn't be an issue.
Please refer to the notes below for more information about the lock queue overflow and management.
[Note 552289 - FAQ: R/3 Lock management|https://websmp230.sap-ag.de/sap(bD1wdCZjPTAwMQ==)/bc/bsp/spn/sapnotes/index2.htm?numm=552289]
[Note 13907 - System error in the block handler, overflow lock table|https://websmp230.sap-ag.de/sap(bD1wdCZjPTAwMQ==)/bc/bsp/spn/sapnotes/index2.htm?numm=13907]

How to Create an Alert on a V$Lock Table

Hi Gurus,
Can anyone help me out on. how to create an event alert on locks table (V$LOCK). so that whenever a table is locked , i can send the email notificaiton to the user regarding the locking history.
any approach is highly appreciable.

Hi,
as event alerts in eBS in fact are based on trigger concept and it's not allowed to
create triggers on objects owned by SYS i don't think that this will be possible.
Regards

Enqueue Replication Server - Lock Table Size

Note : I think I had posted it wrongly under ABAP Development, hence request moderator to kindly delete this post. Thanks
Dear Experts,
If Enqueue Replication server is configured, can you tell me how to check the Lock Table size value, which we set using profile parameter enque/table_size.
If enque server is configured in the same host as CI, it can be checked using
ST02 --> Detail Analysis Menu --> Storage --> Shared Memory Detail --> Enque Table
As it is a Standalone Enqueue Server, I don't know where to check this value.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Best Regards
L Raghunahth

Hi
Raghunath
Check the following links
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/37/a2e3ab344411d3acb00000e83539c3/content.htm
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04s/helpdata/en/44/5efc11f3893672e10000000a114a6b/content.htm
Regards
Bhaskar

MM42 change material, split valuation at batch level, M301, locking table

Dear All,
I'm working on ECC 6.0 retail and I have activated split valuation at batch level. Now in MBEW for this specific material I have almost 14.400 entries.
If I try to change some material data (MM42) I receive an error message M3021 A system error has occurred while locking and then Lock table overflow.
I used SM12 to see the table (while MM42 is still running) and it seems that MBEW is the problem.
What should I do? For any material modification the system has to modify every entry in MBEW? Is there any possibility to skip this?
Thank you.

Hi,
Symptom
Key word: Enqueue
FM: A system error has occurred in the block handler
Message in the syslog: lock table overflowed
Other terms
M3021 MM02 F5 288 F5288 FBRA
Reason and Prerequisites
The lock table has overflowed.
Cause 1: Dimensions of the lock table are too small
Cause 2: The update lags far behind or has shut down completely, so that the lock entries of the update requests that are not yet updated cause the lock table to overflow.
Cause 3: Poor design of the application programs. A lock is issued for each object in an application program, for example a collective run with many objects.
Solution
Determine the cause:
SM12 -> Goto -> Diagnosis (old)
SM12 -> Extras -> Diagnosis (new)
checks the effectiveness of the lock management
SM12 -> Goto -> Diagnosis in update (old)
SM12 -> Extras -> Diagnosis in update (new)
checks the effectiveness of the lock management in conjunction with updates
SM12 -> OkCode TEST -> Error handling -> Statistics (old, only in the enqueue server)
SM12 -> Extras -> Statistics (new)
shows the statistics of the lock management, including the previous maximum fill levels (peak usage) of the partial tables in the lock table
If the owner table overflows, cause 2 generally applies.
In the alert monitor (RZ20), an overrunning of the (customizable) high-water marks is detected and displayed as an alert reason.
The size of the lock table can be set with the profile parameter u201Cenque/table_size =u201C. specifies the size of the lock table in kilobytes. The setting must be made in the profile of the enqueue server ( u2026_DVEBM.. ). The change only takes effect after the restart of the enqueue server.
The default size is 500 KB in the Rel 3.1x implementation of the enqueue table. The resulting sizes for the individual tables are:
Owner table: approx 560.
Name table: approx 560.
Entry table: approx 2240.
As of Rel 4.xx the new implementation of the lock table takes effect.
It can also be activated as described in note 75144 for the 3.1I kernel. The default size is 2000 KB. The resulting sizes for the individual tables are:
Owner table: approx 5400
Name table: approx 5400
Entry table: approx 5400
Example: with the
u201Cenque/table_size =32000u2033 profile parameter, the size of the enqueue table is set to 32000 KB. The tables can then have approx 40,000 entries.
Note that the above sizes and numbers depend on various factors such as the kernel release, patch number, platform, address length (32/64-bit), and character width (Ascii/Unicode). Use the statistics display in SM12 to check the actual capacity of the lock table.
If cause 2 applies, an enlargement of the lock table only delays the overflow of the lock table, but it cannot generally be avoided.
In this case you need to eliminate the update shutdown or accelerate the throughput of the update program using more update processes. Using CCMS (operation modes, see training BC120) the category of work processes can be switched at runtime, for example an interactive work process can be converted temporarily into an update process, to temporarily increase the throughput of the update.
For cause 3, you should consider a tuning of the task function. Instead of issuing a large number of individual locks, it may be better to use generic locks (wildcard) to block a complete subarea. This will also allow you to considerably improve the performance.

Lock table overflow 1 & Error 7 when sending an IDoc

dear all,
we r getting error in purchasing cube for itm datasource
2lis_o2_itm for delta...
1.Lock table overflow 1
2.Error 7 when sending an IDoc
3.Errors in source system
when i check in details it is showing :
Data Package 1 : arrived in BW ; Processing : Selected number does not agree with transferred n
its daily delta..plz give me solution its urgent....
at request in manage...we got some records...wat shud the process..
Thanks in adv
pinky reddy
Edited by: pinky reddy on Apr 8, 2008 7:42 AM

solved

Error " RFC Status :- Lock table overflow "in event trace ( SWEL )

Hi experts ,
I will not mention this post as URGENT but you guys can understand the importance as I am in PRD Support of my workflows .
My Workflow is throughing error in SWEL , as below   and after error its getting deactivated .
The workflow is triigering based on the BO : DRAW and event CREATED .
Error : RFC Status           Lock table overflow
In feedback after error the message is : A system error has occurred in lock management .
I have resolved the deactivation problem after error , but   can any body please suggest me what is the root cause of this error , so that i can try to avoid that error .
Regards
Prabhudutta
Edited by: Prabhudutta Behera on Nov 20, 2008 5:58 AM

This error I have not faced. i will suggest you to check SWU3 transaction Code and check everything is configured. Also check SM12 and SM58. Also I will ask you to contact the Basis Guys related to this issue. Also check WF-BATCH is having all the authorization required. Try to replicate this from the system where Workflow is working.
Thanks
Arghadip

Lock table

My archival jobs continuously fails because of Lock table overflow even after increasing parameter enque/table_size and then bounced.
But in SM12 No lock entries found
Under SM12 EXTRAS -> STATISTICS OR DIAGONOSTIICS are inactive
Job logs as below...
Job started
Step 001 started (program ZRJJARC20, variant CLL4, user ID MINIO)
Archiving session 000078 is being created
Lock table overflow
Job cancelled after system exception ERROR_MESSAGE
Regards,
Peter

But i want to know why job fails even after clear lock entries in SM12.
Below find statics of locks
Enqueue Operations     42726
rejected     47
Error occured     1
Dequeue Operations     4349
Error occured     0
Dequeue All Operations     3735
Cleanup Operations     0
Backup Operations     2
Read Operations     5
Compress Operations     0
Verify Operations     0
Records written     29182
to the backup file     4
Maximum Number of Lock Owners     25311
Maximum Fill level     8
Current Fill Level     6
Maximum Number of Lock Arguments     25311
Maximum Fill level     25310
Current Fill Level     6
Maximum Number of Lock Entries     25311
Maximum Fill level     25310
Current Fill Level     6
Update; Fill Level at Maximum     1
Current Fill Level     0
Time in Lock Table /Seconds     2.876618s
Wait for Lock Table /Seconds     0.736393s
Time in Lock Server /Seconds     0.000000s

Lock table overflow problem in transaction sm58

Hi ,
I have a file to idoc scenario.I am on xi 7.0 sp09.
I am posting about 10000 records at one time in a 1 mb file.
In idx5 i am able to idocs .
However in transaction SM58 I am seeing Lock table overflow error .
Regards ,
Deepak

Deepak,
Here you can solve the problem in two ways
1) increase the size of the lock table via parameter
enque/table_size
2) or increase the enque work processes from 1 to 2 or 3
via parameter rdisp/wp_no_enq
Please have a look on SAP Note: 928044.
---Satish

JDBC Lock Table

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for