Multiple users accessing the same data in a global temp table

I have a global temp table (GTT) defined with 'on commit preserve rows'. This table is accessed via a web page using ASP.NET. The application was designed so that every one that accessed the web page could only see their data in the GTT.
We have just realized that the GTT doesn't appear to be empty as new web users use the application. I believe it has something to do with how ASP is connecting to the database. I only see one entry in the V$SESSION view even when multiple users are using the web page. I believe this single V$SESSION entry is causing only one GTT to be available at a time. Each user is inserting into / selecting out of the same GTT and their results are wrong.
I'm the back end Oracle developer at this place and I'm having difficulty translating this issue to the front end ASP team. When this web page is accessed, I need it to start a new session, not reuse an existing session. I want to keep the same connection, but just start a new session... Now I'm losing it.. Like I said, I'm the back end guy and all this web/connection/pooling front end stuff is magic to me.
The GTT isn't going to work unless we get new sessions. How do we do this?
Thanks!

DGS wrote:
I have a global temp table (GTT) defined with 'on commit preserve rows'. This table is accessed via a web page using ASP.NET. The application was designed so that every one that accessed the web page could only see their data in the GTT.
We have just realized that the GTT doesn't appear to be empty as new web users use the application. I believe it has something to do with how ASP is connecting to the database. I only see one entry in the V$SESSION view even when multiple users are using the web page. I believe this single V$SESSION entry is causing only one GTT to be available at a time. Each user is inserting into / selecting out of the same GTT and their results are wrong.
I'm the back end Oracle developer at this place and I'm having difficulty translating this issue to the front end ASP team. When this web page is accessed, I need it to start a new session, not reuse an existing session. I want to keep the same connection, but just start a new session... Now I'm losing it.. Like I said, I'm the back end guy and all this web/connection/pooling front end stuff is magic to me.
The GTT isn't going to work unless we get new sessions. How do we do this?
Thanks!You may want to try changing your GTT to 'ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS' and have the .Net app use a transaction object.
We had a similar problem and I found help in the following thread:
Re: Global temp table problem w/ODP?
All the best.

Similar Messages

Please help! Multiple users accessing the same data sets

Hi all,
Can anyone provide a bit of insight in to a question I have?
We have two users that require to see the same set of data in the BPC Excel interface at the same time. The information is employees and date.
User 1 would like to see All Employee SignedData for 1 month, and User 2 would like to see just a slice of the Employees for 1 month.
If both of the Users are logged in at the same time, what will happen in terms of SAP 'locking' the data set? I am aware of Data Access Profiles to restrict their access to particular Master Data but there will be the requirement for users to see (maybe just in read-only), data that is shared between both Users.
Will it throw up an error or can I make it so that users have 'read only' access?
Any advice would be very much appreciated!
Nick

Hi Nick,
No issue with that at all.
They can even both have write access. If they try to update the exact same record at the same time BPC will just keep writing Delta records.
User A enters 10
User B enters 20
User A refreshes and will get 20
User B refreshes and also gets 20

Prevent multiple users accessing the same form

hi,
i am working in forms
i have a requirement like this
if more than one user are using the same form and try to access the same record then the second user should not be able to do transaction
he should be popped up with a msg saying that other user is working on it
can any one suggest how to do this in my form
thanks in advance
selvaraj s

That is pretty much exactly the way Forms works automatically.
Two users can use the same form, and can even display the same data record. One of the users can make changes to the record -- Forms locks the row upon the FIRST keystroke in the first field the user begins to change.
Once the row is locked, the second user is free to look at the record, and won't even know if another user has begun making changes. However, if second user tries to change even one field in the record, Forms pops up the message, "Could not reserve record (2 tries). Keep trying? Yes / No"
There are also protections so if the first user actually changes the row and commits, then the second user tries to make a change. Forms will automatically detect whether changes were made, and if so, will undo the change and issue the message, "FRM-40654: Record has been updated by another user. Re-query to see change."
The above automatic processing works very nicely. If it will not work for you, then what is it you need?

What happens when multiple users access the same servlet?

Do the users share all the same resources? Or is a new process generated for each user? I have a servlet that builds a string to return to the user and I only have myself to test, so I can't really see what happens when many users access the servlet. Is there a possibility that the string will get screwed up, like when dealing with multiple threads, or do all the users get their own resources and I don't have to worry about that?

huh? if you can point a test servlet at it, you can point a browser at it (even if the servlet does not serve html it will run)
try pasting the servlet URL into a web browser
refreshing multiple browsers repeatedly could provide a manual test

Multiple users accessing the same server.

Ok here is my issue, about 2 months ago I started having issues with Filesharing on my 2012 Mac Mini running Lion server (current update). We have 3 users that VPN into our conpany network and usually access the same folder, 2 months ago they started conflicting with each other. When one VPNs into the network and connects to the server they are fine, if the second one connects to the network they are fine but if the second one tries to access the fileshare they knock the second one off the server. The first one's connection eventually hangs and they have to completely disconnect from the VPN. I am wondering if this was caused by a patch or if there is something else going on. I have tried to reboot the server and checked the logs for anything but I am not seeing what may be causing this. I have restarted the Filesharing in the Server app and still get the same problem, the users are connecting via local credentials to the server. I don't think it is a password issue since either user can log in and access as long as another user doesn't so I am not sure what the issue could be.
any help appriciated,
josh

By 'standard record locking system' do you mean there is nothing I need to do programatically? No block level properties to change?
So you are saying this is just the way it always works. So as soon as one of our call center agents opens a record all I have to do is create a pending update to any field?
But won't another user be able to open the form and just query that record not knowing another user has it open?

Multiple User Accessing the same record issue

I am planning to design an app where we have the following use case requirement.
If a user who is logged into the system is accessing a record(plan in this case) anyone else who is logged into the system at the same time should be locked out of that same plan but should still be able to access other plans in the system. A plan has many things associated with it so the 2nd user should be locked out of everything associated to the plan being accessed by the first user.
What is the best way to implement this at the application or the database level?
Here are some options we have been bouncing around.
1. When the first user logs in and accesses the first plan we lock the plan at the app level using a singleton class which has one and only one instance on the app server. The plan_id can be put as an entry into a hashtable which can be in the session and is created if one does not exist. When the 2nd user tries to access the same plan, since the plan_id is still in the hashtable he would be locked out. However we somehow need to timeout the first user after 30 mts of inactivity or so so that others can access the plan and are not locked out for ever if the first user walks away from his PC or does not close his browser, thus keeping his session alive indefinitely.
2. In the database in the plan table we add a column for 'locked'. When the first entry is created in the plan table locked column is marked as 'yes' or 1 and when the user closes the browser we use some javascript to trigger an event which changes that 'yes' or 1 to 'no' or 0 thus unlocking the plan. However the big issue we see in this concept is that we will have to put a javascript onUnload method in all jsp pages in the app because the user could be anywhere in the app after starting his plan access after login.
Conceptually the 2 options are the same but one is done at the app whereas the other is at the database level.
Is there a better way to handle this scenario using transactions or some other technological option.
Thanks

Another solution involving no modification of the database structure:
As soon as a user want to access a plan, try to UPDATE the plan record... if it fails, the record was locked
by another user before. When the user has finished with the plan, you can COMMIT or ROLLBACK the changes, which will free the lock for other users.
An advantage of this solution is that if program crashes unexpectedly, there will automatically be a ROLLBACK.
Of course, you need a transaction for this... and perhaps more if you want to separate the 'locking transaction' (virtual update just for restricting access) from the 'operating transaction' (in which you will
do the DB stuff: inserts, updates, deletes, etc.)
Hope this helped,
Regards.

Multiple users updates the same data - RowInconsistentException

Hi,
I'm using JDeveloper 11.1.2.1
Locking mode: optimistic
Scenario:
- Have 2 users (user 1 & user 2) running application x
- Both users updates the same record
- user 1 hits save first (and hence no error)
- user 2 hits save after user 1, and gets RowInconsistentException
I have managed to trap the exception in the EntityImpl class:
public void lock() {
try {
super.lock();
catch (RowInconsistentException ex) {
this.refresh(REFRESH_UNDO_CHANGES);
super.lock();
But what this does is that it just refreshed the entities and removed user 2's work without notification, which isn't acceptable.
Instead of this, is it possible to display an error message in user 2's UI (instead of the stack error) , refresh the entities, but keep user's 2 work, and possibly recommit?
Thank You
Regards,
Andi

Andi,
, is it possible to display an error message in user 2's UI (instead of the stack error)You can customise the error handling, yes, to display a different message if you like (check out the Fusion Developer's Guide to find out how)
refresh the entities, but keep user's 2 workNot sure what you mean there
By default (at least it used to be this way, haven't checked recently), if you commit again after receiving the "row inconsistent" error, it will save user 2's changes (potentially overwriting user 1's changes)
John

Multiple Users accessing the same core set of queried data

Hi. We have a small call center and we want to build an app where the users can query the same core set of data and use it to initiate calls to study participants. The trick is that they will also need to update each record with information from the call. So we need to stop two call center agents from potentially calling the same participant at the same time.
Is there a good method or best practice for creating a app to do this? The concern is that multiple call center agents would be querying the screen with the same core set of records (for example, querying by 'Ready for Call' status). When a call is placed the agent will have a conversation with the participant and ultimately end up updating the record after about 10 minutes. So my question is whether there is a good way to keep multiple agents from working with the same record (e.g. calling the same participant simultaneously)?
Right now it seems that Oracle will lock a record for update, but only after an agent has initiated a change to the record. This still leaves a window of opportunity for two or more agents to be calling the same participant at the same time.
Any thoughts or ideas on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.

By 'standard record locking system' do you mean there is nothing I need to do programatically? No block level properties to change?
So you are saying this is just the way it always works. So as soon as one of our call center agents opens a record all I have to do is create a pending update to any field?
But won't another user be able to open the form and just query that record not knowing another user has it open?

There are multiple users with the same display name

Hi,
We have a user and when she get an item assigned to her she sees the following alert:
"There are multiple users with the same display name USERNAME and at least one of them does not have read permissions to some of the files"
Now I looked in the database and when I run the following query with the username:
SELECT
[ProviderDisplayName]
,[DisplayName]
,[HasDisplayName]
,[Domain]
,[AccountName]
,[UniqueUserId]
,[LastSync]
FROM [Tfs_Configuration].[dbo].[tbl_Identity] where displayname like '%USERNAME%'
Then I get 2 same usernames back, How can I get rid of one of them ? When I access TFS trough the portal I only find 1 occurence of this user.
We use VS2013 and TFS2013 update 4
Best regards

Hi DSW,
Thanks for your post.
In your query result, please check if these two users have the same Account Name. if they are two different Account Name in result, it indicate there’s two users have the same display name in your AD, please check that two users’ information in
your AD. We suggest change one user’s display name in AD.
We are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time. Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.
Click
HERE to participate the survey.

Can two users access the same bootcamp (win os) instance?

We are two users who are using our imac and we both have own user names in mac os. I created a bootcamp partition with windows xp on it. Can both users access the same partition and create their own user spaces within xp?
Will that work also if we use Parallel or virtual box? (access the same user data as in boot camp?)
I would like to have the option for each user to access their windows data either through bootcamp or through the virtual tool.
Message was edited by: gss2
Message was edited by: gss2

gss2 wrote:
What do you mean Virtual box it will not run on its own partition? I have a virtual box running on my desktop and it runs just fine ...own partition?? I don't understand.
Running on its own partition means that the installed OS has its own formatted portion (partition) of the hard drive. A virtual machine does not have its own partition. It creates a virtual partition (a file on the computer) that simulates a file system (partition). So Virtual Box, or any other virtualization software, does not run Windows, or any other OS in its own partition.

WebTools Creating multiple users for the same User

I had to make a few changes to a BP in SAP which will synch back into WebTools but now I am getting multiple users for the same contact. For example my user is cspehar_1 now in Webtools there are cspehar_1, cspehar_2, cspehar_3 and so on up to _8.
This is occuring for several users in webtools.
What causes this and how do I fix it?
Thanks,
Craig Spehar

Hi Craig,
There are two ways to cause this that I am aware of:
1. Change the "Business Partner Synch Contacts Field" setting after the initial synch.
2. Change the Web UserID on the BP contact in B1 (OCPR.U_PRX_SID).
After that, update the user in WT and synch. (might also happen if you update the BP in B1)
Since the synch is using the OCPR.U_PRX_SID to identify the contact, it will not be able to find it in B1 if the U_PRX_SID has changed. When it does not find it, it assumes it needs to be created. This results in a duplicate.
The solution is to reset the U_PRX_SID back to what it was or set the synch contact field back to what it was.
Then delete the last created duplicate contact from B1.
There may be further data corruption issues here. If orders/quotes/opportunities or other dependant data has synchronized referencing the duplicate user, these data will need to be correct as well.
FYI, whatever caused this was probably at the root of your order problem as well.

Find my Friends : Support for multiple users under the same Apple ID?

Can multiple users under the same Apple ID use the app to find each other? My daughter uses my Apple ID with her iPod touch which allows me to monitor her purchases but it seems that only one device under an ID can use the app at a time. If that is the case then it is a major disadvantage and I will need to go back to using latitude (or Find My iPhone which also allows me to see where all of my devices are at the same time)

http://isource.com/2011/10/16/how-do-you-set-up-icloud-for-a-family/
This worked for me.

Multiple users on the same ODI installation?

Hi all
is it possible to have multiple users working with the same odi installation? We have a virtualized IT infrastructure (citrix and wmware) where we can have multiple users on the same virtual instance. From our point of view, there is no licencing issue since we have a package covering literally everything.
One of the issues are the config files stored in the installation directory of odi (../bin). Is there a way to tell odi to store them in a different location, eg. the user home?
Thanks a lot
Benno

ODI looks in the current working directory for the configuration files, mostly you would have issues with the snps_login_work.xml and snps_login_security.xml files, but these may be common across all users. (just don't store the username/passwords for the ODI users in them).
The way ODI works, most of what are creating is stored in the repository anyway, it is only local GUI config stuff that may be stored locally.
Short answer, yes, you can, but might need to modify the config files a little to make it work.

Multiple threads access the same method.

Hello,
I have been trying for a long time to find out multiple threads access the shared data.
I have written a sample code, there I my intention is that method has to be accessed
onlny one thread at a time., mean one thread finished the job, then next thread can
access the shared source. But for this code I am not getting the desired out put what I want. But if I am using synchronized block I am getting the output. Please correct where I got mistake. Please see my code.
public class TestThread implements Runnable {
     Shared r;
     public TestThread() {
          r = new Shared();
     public static void main(String args[]) {
          Thread t1 = new Thread(new TestThread());
          Thread t2 = new Thread(new TestThread());
          t1.setName("A");
          t2.setName("B");
          t1.start();
          t2.start();
      * (non-Javadoc)
      * @see java.lang.Runnable#run()
     @Override
     public void run() {
          // TODO Auto-generated method stub
          r.count();
class Shared {
     public synchronized void count() {
          String name = Thread.currentThread().getName();
          System.out.println(name + ":accessed...");
          try {
               for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
                    System.out.println(name + ": " + i);
          } catch (Exception e) {
               // TODO: handle exception
}Thanks
Bhanu lakshmi.

It depends on what you synchronize. Non-static methods synchronize on the object, so if you're using several objects, you'll be able to call each from their own thread.
Make your method synchronized or use only a single object and see the difference.

Events cannot have multiple exceptions for the same date

I just starting getting this message and could not sync to one of my Google calendars. I'm posting this for others who might get the same problem.
I didn't find the answer on these forums but did find it on this thread on Google:
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Calendar/thread?tid=241155f758d9e2a4&hl=en
Here's the important excerpt:
"I had a client, who just had this same issue, nothing to do with Google cals.
It was apparently, in my best guess, a corruption of the subscribed cal.
*I did a get info on the cal, copied the URL, deleted the cal, then re-subscribed to it by pasting in the URL, and now it's working fine*."

I've been having the same problem with my iCal calendars and the "Events cannot have multiple exceptions for the same date" error. Once it gets going, it uses up a lot of the CPU and resources. After reinstalling iCal, all my calendars were missing and I could not even resubscribe to them.
I took my MacBook Pro to the Apple Store, and they were able to solve the problem by moving some of the iCal files from their existing folders out to the desktop, and reopening the program. That got it working, however, now I'm having the same problem again. So back to square one. Anyone else having this issue and know the cause?
My setup is my MacBook Pro uses Entourage, use that calendar in my iCal. And I subscribe to two calendars my wife publishes on her Macbook. We're both using Snow Leopard.

Multiple users accessing the same data in a global temp table

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for