Tuning row lock contention wait events

Hello everyone,
Working on 10g/windows
Top 5 events
EVENT TOTAL_WAITS TIME_WAITED AVG_MS PERCENT
CPU 9462339 48
enq: TX - row lock contention 12531 3660728 2921.34 18
control file parallel write 1300731 3088079 23.74 16
log file parallel write 1510503 1264080 8.37 6
log file sync 1072553 968007 9.03 5
Distribution of row lock wait during the last 4 days in the database server
END_INTERVAL_TIME TOTAL_WAITS TIME_WAITED_MICRO AVG_WAIT_MS
2008-04-01 16:00:58 909 2721008230 2993.41
2008-04-01 15:00:27 50 149941140 2998.82
2008-03-31 12:00:42 193 575595397 2982.36
2008-03-29 23:00:13 172 513058700 2982.9
2008-03-29 22:00:37 164 483940046 2950.85
2008-03-27 22:00:35 565 1667120838 2950.66
2008-03-26 18:00:59 348 1042918982 2996.89
My analysis:
It's obvious that the row lock contention wait time is huge, and this direct me to find out SQL stmt, causing this.
all the SQL statement was SELECT ....... FOR UPDATE stmt.
I was also able to find out locked tables.
My tuning idea:
1. I'm thinking to reorganize hot tables as well as their indexes, but by instinct it seems to not give so much value to avoid the huge row lock wait time.
2. I'm also seeing if I can reduce the number of rows per block, by increasing PCTFREE and diminishing PCTUSED, so the contention will spread over many blocks instead of one heavy block.
Question
As SQL stmt related to those locked tables are select ... for update, how could I tune this kind of stmt?
Does someone have other idea to come up with this row lock contention?
Tanks for your effort and help

Taking another look at your suggested function based index, it depends on the data type of the DEV.POS_FOLIO_ID.POS_FOLIO_ID column. If the column is defined as a number, and it is a primary key, there will already be a usable index on that column.
Yesterday, I wrote this: "Once I understood why or how the sessions were trying to insert duplicate primary key values, I would try to determine why the average number of seconds for the wait event is almost 3 seconds (maybe a timeout)."
After fixing the formatting of the top 5 wait events (total duration unknown):
EVENT                        TOTAL_WAITS  TIME_WAITED   AVG_MS PERCENT
CPU                                         94,623.39             48
enq: TX - row lock contention     12,531    36,607.28  2921.34    18
control file parallel write    1,300,731    30,880.79    23.74    16
log file parallel write        1,510,503    12,640.80     8.37     6
log file sync                  1,072,553     9,680.07     9.03     512,531 * 3 second time out = 37,593 seconds = 10.44 hours.
What if the reason for the 3 second average wait time is due to a timeout. I performed a little experiment... I changed a row in a test table and then made a pot of coffee.
In session 1:
CREATE TABLE T1 (
  C1 NUMBER(10),
  C2 NUMBER(10),
  PRIMARY KEY (C1));
INSERT INTO T1
SELECT
  ROWNUM,
  ROWNUM*10
FROM
  DUAL
CONNECT BY
  LEVEL<=1000000;
COMMIT;I now have a test table with 1,000,000 rows. I start monitoring the changes in the wait events roughly every 60 seconds, and V$SESSION_WAIT and V$LOCK roughly 4 times per second.
Back in session 1:
UPDATE
  T1
SET
  C1=-C1
WHERE
  C1<=100;I have now modified the first 100 rows that were inserted into the table, time to make the pot of coffee.
In session 2, I try to insert a row with a primary key value of -10:
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES (
  -10,
  10);Session 2 hangs.
If I take the third 60 second snap of the system wide wait events as the zero point, and the 11th snap as the end point. There were 149 waits on ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION, 148 time outs, 446.62 seconds of total time in the wait event, with an average wait time of 2.997450 seconds.
Rolling down to the session level wait events, SID 208 (my session 2) had 149 waits on ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION, for a total time of 446.61 seconds with an average wait time of 2.997383 seconds. All of the 149 waits and the wait time was in this one session that was locked up for the full duration of this time period because session 1 was making a pot of coffee.
Rolling down to V$SESSION_WAIT (sampled roughly 4 times per second): At the start of the third time interval, SID 208 has been in the ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION wait event for 39 seconds and is actively waiting trying to execute SQL with a hash value of 1001532423, the wait object is -1, wait file is 0, wait block is 0, wait row is 0, P1 is 1415053316, P2 is 196646, P3 is 4754.
At the end of the 11th time interval: , SID 208 has been in the ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION wait event for 483 seconds and is actively waiting trying to execute SQL with a hash value of 1001532423, the wait object is -1, wait file is 0, wait block is 0, wait row is 0, P1 is 1415053316, P2 is 196646, P3 is 4754.
Rolling down to V$LOCK (sampled roughly 4 times per second): I see that SID 214 (session 1) is blocking SID 208 (session 2). SID 214 has a TX lock in mode 6 with ID1 of 196646 and ID2 of 4754. SID 208 is requesting a TX lock in mode 4 with ID1 of 196646 and ID2 of 4754.
So, it seems that I need a faster coffee pot rather than an additional index on my table. It could be that the above process would have found that the application associated with SID 214 was abandoned or crashed and for some reason the lock was not released for a long period of time, a little less than 10.44 hours in your case.
Charles Hooper
IT Manager/Oracle DBA
K&M Machine-Fabricating, Inc.

Similar Messages

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention wait event

    Hi,
    I would like to find which DML query has not given COMMIT or ROLLBACK after the execution. Because one of the development database have more table locks and developer reported that their session was hanging. I referred AWR report also and more timed waits occurred in the enq: TX - row lock contention. I need to trace which DML query has not commit or rollback.
    Please help me to solve the issue.
    Database version: 11.2.0.1.0
    Foreground Wait Events
    Event
    Waits
    %Time -outs
    Total Wait Time (s)
    Avg wait (ms)
    Waits /txn
    % DB time
    enq: TX - row lock contention
    320
    0
    72,047
    225147
    0.20
    99.53
    log file sync
    547
    0
    14
    26
    0.35
    0.02
    library cache lock
    13
    0
    11
    843
    0.01
    0.02
    SQL*Net break/reset to client
    1,080
    0
    2
    1
    0.69
    0.00
    SQL*Net message to client
    659,006
    0
    1
    0
    421.63
    0.00
    direct path sync
    3
    0
    1
    299
    0.00
    0.00
    SQL*Net more data from client
    5,541
    0
    1
    0
    3.55
    0.00
    db file scattered read
    554
    0
    0
    1
    0.35
    0.00
    SQL*Net more data to client
    14,975
    0
    0
    0
    9.58
    0.00
    db file sequential read
    2,817
    0
    0
    0
    1.80
    0.00
    ADR block file read
    4
    0
    0
    43
    0.00
    0.00
    enq: CR - block range reuse ckpt
    2
    0
    0
    71
    0.00
    0.00
    asynch descriptor resize
    38,073
    100
    0
    0
    24.36
    0.00
    latch: shared pool
    61
    0
    0
    1
    0.04
    0.00
    control file sequential read
    6,900
    0
    0
    0
    4.41
    0.00
    Disk file operations I/O
    550
    0
    0
    0
    0.35
    0.00
    cursor: pin S
    1
    0
    0
    8
    0.00
    0.00
    direct path write temp
    34
    0
    0
    0
    0.02
    0.00
    library cache: mutex X
    5
    0
    0
    1
    0.00
    0.00
    latch: In memory undo latch
    2
    0
    0
    1
    0.00
    0.00
    buffer busy waits
    14
    0
    0
    0
    0.01
    0.00
    SQL*Net message from client
    658,990
    0
    294,847
    447
    421.62
    jobq slave wait
    669
    99
    333
    497
    0.43
    PL/SQL lock timer
    1
    100
    1
    998
    0.00

    Oracle does not and cannot tell you from historical views (e.g. AWR) which DMLs have not COMMITed or ROLLBACKed. A Transaction ends with a COMMIT or ROLLBACK.  The transaction could have a million (or more) DML statements with a million (or more) SELECT statements between the first DML and the COMMIT / ROLLBACK.
    Even identifying such DMLs in real time is close to impossible.  Because the session holding the lock may have issued  a dozen or a million subsequent SQL statements while other sessions are waiting for the lock.  You can only identify the session that is the lock holder (the BLOCKING_SESSION in V$SESSION).
    If you have tracing enabled for all sessions, then you could review the trace file for the BLOCKING_SESSION to identify the DML(s) the session has executed.
    Hemant K Chitale

  • Row lock contention...

    Hello,
    I am working on Oracle 10.2.0.4 on AIX .
    In awr reports we found 'row lock contention' as top wait events. As my knowledge There are two types of locks..
    1. Deadlock - where oracle will automatically rollback the locking query and generate deadlock trace file.
    2. A user session update some rows and not commit/rollback , so other sessions which need to lock same rows , were witing. So dba need to manully kill first
    session which was holding lock.
    We want to know , in which of above scenario in awr report we can see 'row lock contention' wait.
    any idea ..

    Ok, first, I think your definitions are a bit off.
    There is the concept of a lock, or an enqueue. The terms 'lock' and 'enqueue' are synonymous, in Oracle.
    A lock (or enqueue) protects a 'resource'. A TX (transaction) enqueue protects rows which have been locked. Only one transaction is permitted to modify a specific row in a specific table, at a time, for obvious reasons.
    A row-level lock occurs when a session attempts to modify a row that another session has already locked. When that occurs, the session attempting the lock will wait on a TX enqueue.
    These types of locks occur all the time in Oracle, and are not necessarily a bad thing. They are a sign that Oracle is protecting the integrity of your data, and that's a good thing.
    However, when waits on row-level locks begin to dominate the response time of your application, then you have a problem. Generally, this is going to come down to your application design. How can you avoid concurrent sessions colliding on their updates to specific rows? This is something that only you, with your knowledge of your application, can answer.
    Finally, you mentioned the term 'deadlock' before. A deadlock occurs when two or more sessions are simultaneously holding a lock that the other is waiting on, while waiting on a lock the other is holding.
    A simple example would be as follows:
    Consider table_a, with row1 and row2.
    Session 1 takes a lock on row1, no problem.
    Session 2 takes a lock on row2, no problem.
    Now, session 1 attempts to take a lock on row2, but session 2 has lock, so it waits.
    Now, session 2 attempts to take a lock on row1, but session 1 has lock, so it waits.
    This is a deadlock. It would wait forever. But, the Oracle kernel has a deadlock detection mechanism. So, within 3 seconds, Oracle will detect a deadlock, and one of the sessions (usually the one that has been waiting the longest) will catch ORA-00060 deadlock detected, and statement level rollback will occur.
    Hope that clarifies your questions and/or doubts,
    -Mark

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention in TOP 5 wait event

    DB version:11.1.0.7.0
    I am having enq: TX - row lock contention in top 5 wait event.
    AWR analyze period - 9-10(pm). During this time only one sql loader is running to insert the data. No other job are running. So there is no chance of other session blocking this session. is there any chance of row lock contention happen by same session.
    SQL> SELECT INDEX_NAME,INDEX_TYPE,UNIQUENESS FROM DBA_INDEXES WHERE TABLE_NAME='DATA_DATA';
    INDEX_NAME INDEX_TYPE UNIQUENES
    CIDX      BITMAP NONUNIQUE
    VIDX           BITMAP NONUNIQUE
    Thanks.

    SQL> SELECT INDEX_NAME,INDEX_TYPE,UNIQUENESS FROM DBA_INDEXES WHERE TABLE_NAME='DATA_DATA';
    INDEX_NAME INDEX_TYPE UNIQUENES
    CIDX BITMAP NONUNIQUE
    VIDX BITMAP NONUNIQUEYou have bitmap indexes here on a table being inserted into. Bitmap Indexes are another source of lock(and deadlock) in OLTP application. You said that the SQLloader was the unique active program but may be you are also triggering another procedure after the load. Procedure in which you might be using also automomous transactions and so on...
    Check first if your table is subject to DML operation in a a multi-user concurrent accesss and in which case you have to get rid of those bitmap indexes
    http://hourim.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/deadlock-%e2%80%93-part-1-bitmap-index/
    Best regards
    Mohamed Houri
    www.hourim.wordpress.com

  • V$system_event, timeouts and row lock contention

    Hello everyone,
    What is the meaning of the total_timeouts column in the v$system_event view if it is related to the event "enq: TX - row lock contention"?
    How can we have a timeout since "query timeout" is a non existent concept on Oracle?
    Maybe I am wrong.
    Regards.
    Carl

    Hello everyone,
    What is the meaning of the total_timeouts column in
    the v$system_event view if it is related to the event
    "enq: TX - row lock contention"?
    How can we have a timeout since "query timeout" is a
    non existent concept on Oracle?
    Maybe I am wrong.
    Regards.
    CarlThe value for timeouts, in this case, indicates the number of times one of the sessions had to wait a full 3 second time slice while waiting for a second session to either commit or roll back, in anticipation of a potential primary key violation. If the second session commits, the first session will receive an error indicating a primary key violation.
    Test setup:
    In session 2:
    CREATE TABLE T1 (C1 VARCHAR2(20) PRIMARY KEY);
    INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('ORACLE');
    In session 1:
    INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('ORACLE');
    After executing tha above, allow 60 seconds to elapse after the insert in session 1, and then check the delta values in either V$SYSTEM_EVENT or V$SESSION_EVENT:
    20 waits on ENQ: TX - ROW LOCK CONTENTION, 19 timeouts, 59.99 seconds, with an average wait of 2.9995 seconds.
    Charles Hooper
    IT Manager/Oracle DBA
    K&M Machine-Fabricating, Inc.

  • Index contention & row lock contention

    Hi,
    Recently our application loaded a handsome amount of data into our production database. The process took around 5 to 6 hours. During this process, we observed that the performance degraded.
    The major wait events are
    1) TX index contention (concurrency) and
    2) ROW LOCK CONTENTION (application).
    The sql which lead to index contention is a simple insert statement into a table x and row lock contention is into a table y.
    Both x and y are major detail tables of our application. X has around 4 foreign keys, one foriegn key is referencing table y. the foreign key column x is indexed.
    our database is on 10gR2 and using ASSM.
    The data block wait event stats during the load process is as follows
    select * from dba_hist_waitstat where snap_id between '21454' and '21462' AND WAIT_COUNT>0 and class='data block';
    SNAP_ID DBID INSTANCE_NUMBER CLASS WAIT_COUNT TIME
    21454 3937665896 1 data block 195089769 33899167
    21455 3937665896 1 data block 195095958 33902183
    21456 3937665896 1 data block 195096398 33902377
    21457 3937665896 1 data block 195097225 33902843
    21458 3937665896 1 data block 195628987 34037147
    21459 3937665896 1 data block 195944006 34055524
    21460 3937665896 1 data block 195944496 34055642
    21461 3937665896 1 data block 196183308 34112433
    21462 3937665896 1 data block 196213292 34127409
    9 rows selected.
    select snap_id,eq_type,req_reason, total_req#, total_wait#,failed_req#, cum_wait_time from dba_hist_enqueue_stat where snap_id between '21454' and '21462' and failed_req#>0 and eq_type='TM'
    SYS@sqdb AS SYSDBA> /
    SNAP_ID EQ REQ_REASON TOTAL_REQ# TOTAL_WAIT# FAILED_REQ# CUM_WAIT_TIME
    21454 TM contention 682928465 14 2735 1750
    21455 TM contention 682939964 14 2735 1750
    21456 TM contention 682950668 14 2735 1750
    21457 TM contention 682967980 14 2735 1750
    21458 TM contention 682983109 14 2735 1750
    21459 TM contention 682998136 14 2735 1750
    21460 TM contention 683006816 14 2735 1750
    21461 TM contention 683018179 14 2735 1750
    21462 TM contention 683432945 14 2735 1750
    9 rows selected.
    I dont see any significant ITL contention on these objects compared to other contention. (from segment statistics)
    SYS@sqdb AS SYSDBA> select b.object_name,a.snap_id, a.physical_writes_total,a.physical_writes_delta,a.physical_reads_total,a.physical_reads_delta, a.itl_waits_total,a.itl_waits_delta from dba_hist_seg_stat a,(select object_id,object_name from dba_objects where owner='ABCD') b where snap_id between '21454' and '21462' and a.obj#= b.object_id and a.itl_waits_delta> 0 order by itl_waits_delta,2,1;
    OBJECT_NAME SNAP_ID PHYSICAL_WRITES_TOTAL PHYSICAL_WRITES_DELTA PHYSICAL_READS_TOTAL PHYSICAL_READS_DELTA ITL_WAITS_TOTAL ITL_WAITS_DELTA
    IX4_Y 21462 37958 169 105668 174 38 1
    IX4_X 21462 102380 1480 147196 5780 56 1
    As per the application design, for each row of Y, there are multiple number of rows in X and it varies. What additional information do you think I should be collecting and any tips to fix the issue?
    Thanks,
    Murthy

    hi
    Are you using in your insert statement something like "SELECT ... FOR UPDATE"
    post the result of this query during the error:
    SELECT * FROM DBA_BLOCKERS;
    SELECT * FROM DBA_WAITERS;

  • Row lock contention error to resolve

    hi,
    i m facing sever issue with row lock contention error for the statement and causing concurrency and application usage more making database vulnerable
    UPDATE RULE_DATA SET RULE_DATA = :B3 , UPDATED_BY = :B2 , UPDATED_DATE = SYSDATE WHERE RULE_DATA_SEQ_ID = :B1
    RETURNING PAT_GEN_DETAIL_SEQ_ID INTO :O0
    in this query RULE_DATA_SEQ_ID is primary key and and having index too, how can i over come row lock contention error ,
    if i try like this will it work
    UPDATE RULE_DATA SET RULE_DATA = :B3 , UPDATED_BY = :B2 , UPDATED_DATE = SYSDATE WHERE RULE_DATA_SEQ_ID = :B1
    RETURNING PAT_GEN_DETAIL_SEQ_ID INTO :O0
    log errors into temp_log (sysdate||:O0 ) REJECT LIMIT UNLIMITED;
    commit;
    please help me;

    select sid,  sql_text from v$session s, v$sql q
    where sid in (select sid from v$session
    where state in ('WAITING')
    and wait_class != 'Idle'
    and event='enq: TX - row lock contention'
    and (q.sql_id = s.sql_id or q.sql_id = s.prev_sql_id));
    from the above query if found the sid and sql_text,
    actually three procedures been called at once as a batch from java and given auto commit at once for the batch;
    and in one of the procedure it is called by multiple times with different seq_id's
    what i thought is by logging error can we skip the update statement from locking , this what happening
    where v_tariff_detail_seq_id will be 25,26,28,29,30 like records
    begin
    IF v_tariff_detail_seq_id = 0 THEN
    INSERT INTO pat_tariff_details (
    tariff_detail_seq_id,
    pat_gen_detail_seq_id,
    ward_type_id ,
    room_type_id ,
    days_of_stay ,
    requested_amount,
    approved_amount,
    maximum_allowed_amount,
    notes,
    added_by,
    added_date )
    VALUES (
    pat_tariff_details_seq.NEXTVAL ,
    v_pat_gen_detail_seq_id,
    v_ward_type_id ,
    v_room_type_id ,
    v_days_of_stay ,
    v_requested_amount ,
    v_approved_amount,
    v_maximum_allowed_amount,
    v_notes,
    v_added_by,
    SYSDATE );
    ELSE
    UPDATE pat_tariff_details SET
    room_type_id = v_room_type_id,
    days_of_stay = v_days_of_stay,
    requested_amount = v_requested_amount,
    approved_amount = v_approved_amount,
    maximum_allowed_amount = v_maximum_allowed_amount,
    notes = v_notes,
    updated_by = v_added_by,
    updated_date = SYSDATE
    WHERE tariff_detail_seq_id = v_tariff_detail_seq_id;
    END IF;
    end;
    version is Oracle Database 10g Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bit Production
    Edited by: user13134817 on Nov 2, 2012 2:39 AM

  • Row lock contention on WWV_FLOW_DATA

    I'm hosting an APEX app on one of my Oracle servers
    Oracle 10.1.0.4.0
    APEX 3.0.0
    The users (and APEX developer) are complaining about slow performance. One of the primary reasons seems to be as a result of row lock contention. And as this is on an APEX table, I think it is fair to think that this is not a finger-up-nose mistake from the APEX developer.
    This is what I for example just saw some minutes ago. 3 APEX sessions running for application 103 and page 1 according to V$SESSION.
    Wait status for all 3 sessions (ticking over into many minutes) is:
    enq: TX - row lock contention
    The one session shows this SQL:
    INSERT INTO WWV_FLOW_DATA ( FLOW_INSTANCE, ITEM_ID, ITEM_VALUE )
    VALUES ( :B4 , :B3 , :B2 ||':'||:B1 ||':0:0')
    The other two sessions shows this SQL:
    UPDATE WWV_FLOW_DATA SET ITEM_VALUE = NVL(NVL(:B6 ,:B5 ),1)||':'
    || NVL(NVL(:B4 ,:B3 ),15)||':0:0' WHERE ITEM_ID = :B2 AND FLOW_I
    NSTANCE = :B1
    Fair to assume that all 3 are hitting the same row? (same flow instance and item?)
    I've done some searching and it seems that a lot of dead locks have been reported on similar APEX tables. Is this potentially the same underlaying issue, but with just slightly different symptoms?
    Some speculation... tabbed browsing is very common with Firefox. I often open multiple tabs on the same APEX app for different pages. What will the back-end impact be if this is done on the same page? Could it be that APEX expects a single-HTTP-request-at-a-time-from-a-web-session?
    What does not make sense though is why the update will show row lock contention, assuming all 3 hit the same row. The INSERT should when inserting a row with the same PK as that of an uncommitted inserted row of another session. But why would the UPDATEs in this scenario show row lock enqueues? The INSERT row enqueue points that the row has not yet been committed. If so, the 3rd session's UPDATE should return "no row found" and not be stuck on a row lock enqueue.. right?
    This does not make much sense to me.
    Any comments, suggestions, and ideas to troubleshoot and resolve this will be much appreciated.

    > When you and the APEX developer say "slow performance", have you ensured
    that this is not logic in the APEX application itself?
    The "slow performance" the APEX developer and users mention are usually pages timing out all together. There are no real heavy and complex SQLs executed to my knowledge (none I see on the server side). So I do not think it is an application SQL issue - besides, the "slow performance" on the back-end side, when reported, I seen as sessions spinning on enqueue TX locks.
    Not my APEX system so I'm not that familiar with it, but I had a quick look at it. The pages are relatively simplistic as there is no custom stuff (unlike some my APEX apps ;-) ).
    Also, this problem does not occur on a specific page, but intermittently on different pages.
    > were they all for the same APEX session emanating from the same client?
    Unsure.. I kind of expect these will have to be or else the SQL statement will be hitting a different flows row all together (which is why I speculated about the tabbed browser issue). Busy investigating this closer.
    >Have statistics been computed recently on the FLOWS_030000 schema?
    No. Interesting point as I've (very stupidly) never even considered running DBMS_STATS on the flows schema...
    What is interesting btw is that SQL is not static. The latest blocks (same event, same symptoms as described in my original posting) were on this SQL:
    UPDATE WWV_FLOW_PREFERENCES$ SET ATTRIBUTE_VALUE = :B5 WHERE USE
    R_ID = NVL(:B4 ,NVL(:B3 ,USER)) AND PREFERENCE_NAME = :B2 AND SE
    CURITY_GROUP_ID = :B1
    It also could be as a result of multiple sessions from the same web browser due to clicking a button/link more than once, or refreshing the browser without waiting at least a few seconds for a response.. (also, the fact that the browser is waiting for a response is not very visual/noticeable to the user)
    Am planning to spend some time on this issue tomorrow and will try and provide better technical feedback.
    If you have anything specific I can test from my side, please just shout Joel.

  • Row lock contention problem on Inventory Management

    Hi
    My client is product based company and have e-Commerce (online Sale Order) application using Oracle database 10.2.0.5 & Web application deployed on WLS. Client have ~ 90 Warehouse country wide and ~ 200 Products (Items). Each product stock for each warehouse is maintained in Inventory Table (INV_BALANCE) which get updated for each order and their sale's products. We are using NO WAIT function to acquire lock on row to update stock balance. Last few months, client business is growing very fast and during Promotional Events (EXPO), they have sales of ~ 75K orders (~ 250K Items) within 2-3 days which start causing  row lock contention problem on INV_BALANCE table. We are seeing lots of "Row Lock Wait" and "enq: TX - row lock contention" event which cause ORA-00060: Deadlock detected and we need to eventually clear blocking sessions or everything just choked.
    select statistic_name,value from sys.v_$segment_statistics where object_name = 'INV_BALANCE'
    STATISTIC_NAME                                                                                                                        VALUE
    logical reads                                                                                                                                12423072
    buffer busy waits                                                                                                                           3895
    db block changes                                                                                                                         3516768
    physical reads                                                                                                                               957
    physical writes                                                                                                                            12197
    row lock waits                                                                                                                             49909
    space used                                                                                                                                -52921
    Deadlock graph:
                           ---------Blocker(s)--------  ---------Waiter(s)---------
    Resource Name          process session holds waits  process session holds waits
    TX-00880017-00002584       321    1675     X            110    1445           X
    TX-00b60008-00000741       110    1445     X            337    2158           X
    TX-0148000b-0000009e       337    2158     X            378    1525           X
    TX-01d50015-0000006f       378    1525     X            363    1842           X
    TX-02290012-00000070       363    1842     X            267    1798           X
    TX-024a0026-0000006e       267    1798     X            364    2084           X
    TX-020a0004-0000006f       364    2084     X            135    2113           X
    TX-01dc001f-00000070       135    2113     X            129    1586           X
    session 1675: DID 0001-0141-000001CA    session 1445: DID 0001-006E-00000202
    session 1445: DID 0001-006E-00000202    session 2158: DID 0001-0151-0000026B
    session 2158: DID 0001-0151-0000026B    session 1525: DID 0001-017A-00000167
    session 1525: DID 0001-017A-00000167    session 1842: DID 0001-016B-000002B4
    session 1842: DID 0001-016B-000002B4    session 1798: DID 0001-010B-000001F1
    Rows waited on:
    Session 1445: obj - rowid = 0001AE0E - AAAlK8AAHAAD7rMABY
      (dictionary objn - 110094, file - 7, block - 1030860, slot - 88)
    Session 2158: obj - rowid = 0001AE0E - AAAlK8AAHAAD7rMACD
      (dictionary objn - 110094, file - 7, block - 1030860, slot - 131)
    Session 1525: obj - rowid = 0001AE0E - AAAlK8AAHAAD7rOAB2
      (dictionary objn - 110094, file - 7, block - 1030862, slot - 118)
    Information on the OTHER waiting sessions:
    Session 1445:
      sid: 1445 ser: 37 audsid: 38316795 user: 69/<none>
                program: JDBC Thin Client
      application name: JDBC Thin Client, hash value=2546894660
      Current SQL Statement:
      SELECT ROWID, NVL(QTY_PEND,0)+NVL(:B3 ,0) FROM INV_BALANCE WHERE WHS_ID = :B2 AND STOCK_ID = :B1 FOR UPDATE OF QTY_PEND WAIT 10
    Please help me on following
    Q1: How can we reduce the "row lock Contention" on INV_BALANCE, all possible ways & best practices?
    Q2: How can we change the design to not have "row lock Contention" at all?
    Appreciate your help
    Thanks
    Amit Garg
    www.otnblogs.com

    Hi Amit!
    I saw you are using FOR UPDATE  in your query.
    If you  want reduce row locks, then you not must use FOR UPDATE.
    As you know, FOR UPDATE is locking rows.
    Regards
    Mahir M. Quluzade

  • How to find sql causing "enq: TX - row lock contention"

    Hi,
    In one of our database we keep finding "enq: TX - row lock contention" for 2-3 days. But, then it stopped. The time it happened it blocked other sessions for some long time and it got resolved automatically. Now from ADDM report we got sql queries which waited for this but, we can not find which query from which module was causing the issue. What I should look for that past information. Please help.
    Database is 10gR2 on AIX.
    Regards,
    Gourab

    moreajays wrote:
    Try executing below query real time
    alter session set nls_date_format='dd-mon-yyyy hh24:mi:ss';
    SELECT  vp.spid,c.inst_id,b.session_id sid,c.serial#,a.object_name,
    a.owner object_owner,
    Decode(b.locked_mode, 0, 'None',
    1, 'Null (NULL)',
    2, 'Row-S (SS)',
    3, 'Row-X (SX)',
    4, 'Share (S)',
    5, 'S/Row-X (SSX)',
    6, 'Exclusive (X)',
    b.locked_mode) locked_mode,
    b.oracle_username,
    c.program,
    d.event,
    c.status,
    c.last_call_et,
    c.sql_address,
    e.sql_text, c.logon_time
    FROM   all_objects a,
    gv$locked_object b,
    gv$session c,
    gv$session_wait d,
    gv$sqlarea e,
    gv$process vp
    WHERE  a.object_id = b.object_id
    and b.session_id=c.sid
    and c.sid=d.sid and c.paddr=vp.addr
    and e.address=c.sql_address and lower(d.event) like '%enq%'
    ORDER BY 1;
    The OP asked for a way of find a historic blocker, not a current blocker.
    This query - apart from being one that no-one should want to run on a production system - doesn't say anything about the past, and doesn't identify a blocker.
    It reports the sessions that are being blocked, and EVERY table that is currently locked by each session whether or not the table is involved in the current statement.
    You're using the gv$ (RAC) views but haven't put in any suitable join predicates on the instance (inst_id) columns; the OP is on 10g so you don't need to join to v$session_wait to pick up the wait information; and the join to v$sqlarea forces a "full tablescan" of the library cache (child cursor derived view) because you're joining on address rather than sql_id.
    Regards
    Jonathan Lewis

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention on dual

    Dear Team,
    In my database i can see lots of enq: TX wait in dual
    SID MODULE SQL_ID EVENT SECONDS_IN_WAIT BLOCKING_SESSION STATUS
    2944 IAPPRAISOR_V20.fmx 5pjx5pj5xsmn7 enq: TX - row lock contention 38 2920 ACTIVE
    3050 IAPPRAISOR_V20.fmx enq: TX - row lock contention 769 2915 ACTIVE
    3071 IAPPRAISOR_V20.fmx 5pjx5pj5xsmn7 enq: TX - row lock contention 38 2920 ACTIVE
    3097 IAPPRAISOR_V20.fmx enq: TX - row lock contention 767 3050 ACTIVE
    3117 IAPPRAISOR_V20.fmx 5pjx5pj5xsmn7 enq: TX - row lock contention 572 3319 ACTIVE
    SQL> select * from table(dbms_xplan.display_awr('5pjx5pj5xsmn7'));
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    SQL_ID 5pjx5pj5xsmn7
    SELECT SYSDATE FROM SYS.DUAL
    Plan hash value: 1546270724
    | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | | 2 (100)| |
    | 1 | FAST DUAL | | 1 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
    Is there any idea why select on sys.dual putting execlusive lock? Database version 10.2.0.5.
    Thanks and Regards,
    Rajib Sutradhar

    Show us the result of
    set linesize 120
    set trimspool on
    select * from v$lock where sid = 'sid of holding session'l;
    select * from v$lock where sid = 'sid of one waiting session'l;Please read the note below about readable output.
    Regards
    Jonathan Lewis
    http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
    http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
    To post code, statspack/AWR report, execution plans or trace files, start and end the section with the tag {noformat}{noformat} (lowercase, curly brackets, no spaces) so that the text appears in fixed format.
    There is a +"Preview"+ tab at the top of the text entry panel. Use this to check what your message will look like before you post the message. If it looks a complete mess you're unlikely to get a response. (Click on the +"Plain text"+ tab if you want to edit the text to tidy it up.)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention problem

    Hi ,
    Db version 10.2.0.4
    os solaris.
    i have upgraded my database from 9.2.0.4 to 10.2.0.4 by using exp/imp as my database is small.
    I have created new instance of 10g and changed parameter values as 9i(as required). then imported from 9i to 10g instance.
    After importing in 10g instance we are face application wide performance problem..the response time of the applicatoin was very slow...
    i have taken awr report of various times and have seeen
    SELECT puid,ptimestamp FROM PPOM_OBJECT WHERE puid IN (:1) FOR UPDATE
    this query is causing the problem..enq: TX - row lock contention
    Cache Sizes
    ~~~~~~~~~~~                       Begin        End
                   Buffer Cache:       756M       756M  Std Block Size:         8K
               Shared Pool Size:       252M       252M      Log Buffer:     1,264K
    Load Profile
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~                            Per Second       Per Transaction
                      Redo size:              2,501.54              3,029.25
                  Logical reads:              2,067.79              2,504.00
                  Block changes:                 17.99                 21.78
                 Physical reads:                  0.02                  0.03
                Physical writes:                  0.41                  0.50
                     User calls:                140.74                170.44
                         Parses:                139.55                168.99
                    Hard parses:                  0.01                  0.01
                          Sorts:                 10.65                 12.89
                         Logons:                  0.32                  0.38
                       Executes:                139.76                169.24
                   Transactions:                  0.83
      % Blocks changed per Read:    0.87    Recursive Call %:    17.60
    Rollback per transaction %:    0.00       Rows per Sort:    16.86
    Instance Efficiency Percentages (Target 100%)
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                Buffer Nowait %:  100.00       Redo NoWait %:  100.00
                Buffer  Hit   %:  100.00    In-memory Sort %:  100.00
                Library Hit   %:  100.03        Soft Parse %:  100.00
             Execute to Parse %:    0.15         Latch Hit %:   99.89
    Parse CPU to Parse Elapsd %:   93.19     % Non-Parse CPU:   94.94
    Shared Pool Statistics        Begin    End
                 Memory Usage %:   86.73   86.55
        % SQL with executions>1:   90.99   95.33
      % Memory for SQL w/exec>1:   79.15   90.58
    Top 5 Timed Events                                         Avg %Total
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~                                        wait   Call
    Event                                 Waits    Time (s)   (ms)   Time Wait Class
    CPU time                                            397          86.3
    enq: TX - row lock contention           508          59    115   12.7 Applicatio
    log file sync                         2,991           5      2    1.1     Commit
    log file parallel write               3,238           5      2    1.1 System I/O
    SQL*Net more data to client          59,871           4      0    1.0    Network
    ^LTime Model Statistics              DB/Inst: WGMUGPR2/wgmugpr2  Snaps: 706-707
    -> Total time in database user-calls (DB Time): 460.5s
    -> Statistics including the word "background" measure background process
       time, and so do not contribute to the DB time statistic
    -> Ordered by % or DB time desc, Statistic name
                                                                       Avg
                                                 %Time  Total Wait    wait     Waits
    Event                                 Waits  -outs    Time (s)    (ms)      /txn
    enq: TX - row lock contentio            508     .0          59     115       0.2
    log file sync                         2,991     .0           5       2       1.0
    log file parallel write               3,238     .0           5       2       1.1
    SQL*Net more data to client          59,871     .0           4       0      20.1
    control file parallel write           1,201     .0           1       1       0.4
    SQL*Net more data from clien          3,393     .0           1       0       1.1
    SQL*Net message to client           509,864     .0           1       0     170.9
    os thread startup                         3     .0           1     196       0.0
    db file parallel write                  845     .0           1       1       0.3
    -> % Total DB Time is the Elapsed Time of the SQL statement divided
       into the Total Database Time multiplied by 100
      Elapsed      CPU                  Elap per  % Total
      Time (s)   Time (s)  Executions   Exec (s)  DB Time    SQL Id
            59          1        1,377        0.0    12.9 bwnt27fp0z3gm
    Module: syncdizio_op@snstr09 (TNS V1-V3)
    SELECT puid,ptimestamp FROM PPOM_OBJECT WHERE puid IN (:1) FOR UPDATE
            41         41          459        0.1     8.9 8cdswsp7cva2h
    Module: syncdizio_op@snstr09 (TNS V1-V3)
    select rpad(argument_name, 32, ' ') || in_out || ' ' || nvl(type_subname, data_t
    ype) info from user_arguments where package_name IS NULL and object_name = uppe
    r(:1) and argument_name is not null order by object_name, position
            39         38        7,457        0.0     8.4 271hn6sgra2d8
    Module: syncdizio_op@snstr09 (TNS V1-V3)
    SELECT DISTINCT t_0.puid FROM PIMANTYPE t_0 WHERE (UPPER(t_0.ptype_name) = UPPER
    (:1))
            23         22          459        0.0     4.9 g92t08k78tgrw
    Module: syncdizio_op@snstr09 (TNS V1-V3)
    SELECT PIMANTYPE.puid, ptimestamp, ppid, rowning_siteu, rowning_sitec, pis_froze
    n, ptype_class, ptype_name FROM PPOM_OBJECT, PIMANTYPE WHERE PPOM_OBJECT.puid =
    (PIMANTYPE.puid)
            22         22      158,004        0.0     4.9 chqpmv9c05ghq
    Module: syncdizio_op@snstr09 (TNS V1-V3)
    SELECT puid,ptimestamp FROM PPOM_OBJECT WHERE puid = :1
            17         17        2,294        0.0     3.7 3n5trh11n1x8w
    Module: syncdizio_op@snstr09 (TNS V1-V3)
    SELECT PTYPECANNEDMETHOD.puid, ptimestamp, ppid, rowning_siteu, rowning_sitec, p
    is_frozen, pobject_desc, psecure_bits,VLA_344_5, pmethod_name, pmsg_name, ptype_
    name, pexec_seq, paction_type FROM PPOM_OBJECT,PBUSINESSRULE, PTYPECANNEDMETHOD
    WHERE PTYPECANNEDMETHOD.puid IN (:1,:2,:3,:4,:5,:6,:7,:8,:9,:10,:11,:12,:13,:14,in 9i there is a parameter ENQUEUE_RESOURCES but in 10g relese 2 its got obsoleted....
    am new to performace tunning please advice me....!
    Regards
    Vamshi

    The CBO has changed substantially between 9.2.x and 10.2.x. Pl see MOS Doc 754931.1 (Cost Based Optimizer - Common Misconceptions and Issues - 10g and Above). Pl verify that statistics have been gathered and are current - pl see MOS Doc 605439.1 (Master Note: Recommendations for Gathering Optimizer Statistics on 10g).
    Looking at your output, it seems to me that the database is entirely CPU-bound. 86.3% of time is spent on CPU. The last 5 SQL statements in the output, all of the elapsed time is spent on CPU.
    Pl post your init.ora parameters, along with your hardware specs. This question might be more appropriate in the "Database - General" forum.
    HTH
    Srini

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention-Trace file shared.

    Hi Team,
    I am having enq: TX - row lock contention in top wait event. it is occuring between 10pm - 2am.
    We are having sqlloader job running every one hour(conventional path). But for the specific period of time i am getting "Global Enqueue Services Deadlock detected". Between 10-5. I analyzed realated trace file it is make me little confusion.I found there are four insert query culprit for this locking. out of four sql , tow of them are ran by same SID, other two insert ran by same id. I got confused because how same sid locking them self. trace file below. Please help me on this. during this period oracle maintanence window is active.Thanks
    Trace file:
    *** 2012-10-09 03:40:31.135
    user session for deadlock lock 0x15365e060
    sid: 1104 ser: 22256 audsid: 8797820 user: 49/iurth flags: 0x45
    pid: 71 O/S info: user: oracle, term: UNKNOWN, ospid: 8601
    image: oracle@sgh0909
    client details:
    O/S info: user: user, term: , ospid: 30888
    machine: sgj89909 program: sqlldr@sgj89909 (TNS V1-V3)
    application name: SQL Loader Conventional Path Load, hash value=1935272243
    action name: der/sample.ctl, hash value=3241011749
    current SQL:
    INSERT INTO sample (ID,SU,TIME,PMAN_S,CV_OS,PRD_US,P_DS,PM_LY_DRD_S,PMP_PY_DIDS,PP_S,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE,:SID,CAST(TO_DATE(:PNG_TE, 'DDMMYYY,PMP_TRAN_FRMS,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE_ID,:SUB_ID,CAST(TO_DATE(:POLLING_TIME, 'DDMMYYYYHH24MISS') AS DATE),:PMP_TRAN_OCTS,:PMP_RECV_OCTS,:PMP_DISCARD_US,:PMP_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_US,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_TRAN_FRMS,:PMP_RECV_FRMS) ÷     {+  (Cõ{+  (Cõ{+  ð÷         ð÷         ú;6üΠì/'    „P'            û[þ‡»q         hdšÙÿ   –    $µ            +       л{+  XdšÙÿ   cšÙÿ                         л{+                              M                         L                             šÙ     ƒß    @ešÙÿ  ’Ü    cšÙÿ  lcšÙÿ      M „P'       L
    *** 2012-10-09 03:40:31.533
    Short stack dump:
    <-ksedsts()+315<-ksdxfstk()+32<-ksdxcb()+1764<-sspuser()+112<-__restore_rt()<-semtimedop()+10<-sskgpwwait()+265<-skgpwwait()+156<-ksliwat()+1546<-kslwaitctx()+162<-kjusuc()+3868<-ksipgetctx()+1456<-ksqcmi()+22853<-ksqgtlctx()+4311<-ksqgelctx()+601<-ktcwit1()+333<-ktbgtl0()+1321<-kdimod0()+4581<-kdiblLockPiece()+968<-kdiblLockRange()+1639<-kdiblcfls()+189<-kdiblFinish1()+978<-kdibliFinish()+73<-kxibDoFinish()+90<-kxibFinish()+431<-qerltcEndLoadProcessing()+614<-qerltcLoadStateMachine()+858<-qerltcInsertValues()+218<-qerltcFetch()+1373<-insexe()+1095<-opiexe()+5609<-opiodr()+1220<-ttcpip()+1227<-opitsk()+1449<-opiino()+1026<-opiodr()+1220<-opidrv()+580<-sou2o()+90<-opimai_real()+145<-ssthrdmain()+177<-main()+215<-__libc_start_main()+244<-_start()+41
    user session for deadlock lock 0x1537feef8
    sid: 1107 ser: 44863 audsid: 8797823 user: 49/iurth flags: 0x45
    pid: 57 O/S info: user: oracle, term: UNKNOWN, ospid: 4540
    image: oracle@sgh0909
    client details:
    O/S info: user: user, term: , ospid: 7569
    machine: sgj89909 program: sqlldr@sgj89909 (TNS V1-V3)
    application name: SQL Loader Conventional Path Load, hash value=1935272243
    action name: der/sample.ctl, hash value=3241011749
    current SQL:
    INSERT INTO sample (ID,SU,TIME,PMAN_S,CV_OS,PRD_US,P_DS,PM_LY_DRD_S,PMP_PY_DIDS,PP_S,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE,:SID,CAST(TO_DATE(:PNG_TE, 'DDMMYYY,PMP_TRAN_FRMS,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE_ID,:SUB_ID,CAST(TO_DATE(:POLLING_TIME, 'DDMMYYYYHH24MISS') AS DATE),:PMP_TRAN_OCTS,:PMP_RECV_OCTS,:PMP_DISCARD_US,:PMP_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_US,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_TRAN_FRMS,:PMP_RECV_FRMS) ÷     {+  (Cõ{+  (Cõ{+  ð÷         ð÷         –R<üΠì/'    „P'                            hdšÙÿ  _ž    $µ            +       л{+  XdšÙÿ   cšÙÿ                         л{+                              M                         L                              šÙ     ƒß    @ešÙÿ  ’Ü    cšÙÿ  lcšÙÿ      M „P'       L
    Short stack dump:
    <-ksedsts()+315<-ksdxfstk()+32<-ksdxcb()+1764<-sspuser()+112<-__restore_rt()<-semtimedop()+10<-sskgpwwait()+265<-skgpwwait()+156<-ksliwat()+1546<-kslwaitctx()+162<-kjusuc()+3868<-ksipgetctx()+1456<-ksqcmi()+22853<-ksqgtlctx()+4311<-ksqgelctx()+601<-ktcwit1()+333<-ktbgtl0()+1321<-kdimod0()+4581<-kdiblLockPiece()+968<-kdiblLockRange()+1639<-kdiblcfls()+189<-kdiblFinish1()+978<-kdibliFinish()+73<-kxibDoFinish()+90<-kxibFinish()+431<-qerltcEndLoadProcessing()+614<-qerltcLoadStateMachine()+858<-qerltcInsertValues()+218<-qerltcFetch()+1373<-insexe()+1095<-opiexe()+5609<-opiodr()+1220<-ttcpip()+1227<-opitsk()+1449<-opiino()+1026<-opiodr()+1220<-opidrv()+580<-sou2o()+90<-opimai_real()+145<-ssthrdmain()+177<-main()+215<-__libc_start_main()+244<-_start()+41
    user session for deadlock lock 0x1528de490
    sid: 1107 ser: 44863 audsid: 8797823 user: 49/iurth flags: 0x45
    pid: 57 O/S info: user: oracle, term: UNKNOWN, ospid: 4540
    image: oracle@sgh0909
    client details:
    O/S info: user: user, term: , ospid: 7569
    machine: sgj89909 program: sqlldr@sgj89909 (TNS V1-V3)
    application name: SQL Loader Conventional Path Load, hash value=1935272243
    action name: der/sample.ctl, hash value=3241011749
    current SQL:
    INSERT INTO sample (ID,SU,TIME,PMAN_S,CV_OS,PRD_US,P_DS,PM_LY_DRD_S,PMP_PY_DIDS,PP_S,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE,:SID,CAST(TO_DATE(:PNG_TE, 'DDMMYYY,PMP_TRAN_FRMS,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE_ID,:SUB_ID,CAST(TO_DATE(:POLLING_TIME, 'DDMMYYYYHH24MISS') AS DATE),:PMP_TRAN_OCTS,:PMP_RECV_OCTS,:PMP_DISCARD_US,:PMP_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_US,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_TRAN_FRMS,:PMP_RECV_FRMS) ÷     {+  (Cõ{+  (Cõ{+  ð÷         ð÷         ÍïEüΠì/'    „P'                            hdšÙÿ  €¦    $µ            +       л{+  XdšÙÿ   cšÙÿ                         л{+                              M                         L                              šÙ     ƒß    @ešÙÿ  ’Ü    cšÙÿ  lcšÙÿ      M „P'       L
    *** 2012-10-09 03:40:32.452
    Short stack dump:
    <-ksedsts()+315<-ksdxfstk()+32<-ksdxcb()+1764<-sspuser()+112<-__restore_rt()<-semtimedop()+10<-sskgpwwait()+265<-skgpwwait()+156<-ksliwat()+1546<-kslwaitctx()+162<-kjusuc()+3868<-ksipgetctx()+1456<-ksqcmi()+22853<-ksqgtlctx()+4311<-ksqgelctx()+601<-ktcwit1()+333<-ktbgtl0()+1321<-kdimod0()+4581<-kdiblLockPiece()+968<-kdiblLockRange()+1639<-kdiblcfls()+189<-kdiblFinish1()+978<-kdibliFinish()+73<-kxibDoFinish()+90<-kxibFinish()+431<-qerltcEndLoadProcessing()+614<-qerltcLoadStateMachine()+858<-qerltcInsertValues()+218<-qerltcFetch()+1373<-insexe()+1095<-opiexe()+5609<-opiodr()+1220<-ttcpip()+1227<-opitsk()+1449<-opiino()+1026<-opiodr()+1220<-opidrv()+580<-sou2o()+90<-opimai_real()+145<-ssthrdmain()+177<-main()+215<-__libc_start_main()+244<-_start()+41
    user session for deadlock lock 0x1528de2e0
    sid: 1104 ser: 22256 audsid: 8797820 user: 49/iurth flags: 0x45
    pid: 71 O/S info: user: oracle, term: UNKNOWN, ospid: 8601
    image: oracle@sgh0909
    client details:
    O/S info: user: user, term: , ospid: 30888
    machine: sgj89909 program: sqlldr@sgj89909 (TNS V1-V3)
    application name: SQL Loader Conventional Path Load, hash value=1935272243
    action name: der/sample.ctl, hash value=3241011749
    current SQL:
    INSERT INTO sample (ID,SU,TIME,PMAN_S,CV_OS,PRD_US,P_DS,PM_LY_DRD_S,PMP_PY_DIDS,PP_S,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE,:SID,CAST(TO_DATE(:PNG_TE, 'DDMMYYY,PMP_TRAN_FRMS,PMP_RECV_FRMS) VALUES (:NE_ID,:SUB_ID,CAST(TO_DATE(:POLLING_TIME, 'DDMMYYYYHH24MISS') AS DATE),:PMP_TRAN_OCTS,:PMP_RECV_OCTS,:PMP_DISCARD_US,:PMP_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_US,:PMP_POLICY_DISCARD_DS,:PMP_TRAN_FRMS,:PMP_RECV_FRMS) ÷     {+  (Cõ{+  (Cõ{+  ð÷         ð÷         DlJüΠì/'    „P'                            hdšÙÿ  ¾®    $µ            +       л{+  XdšÙÿ   cšÙÿ                         л{+                              M                         L                              šÙ     ƒß    @ešÙÿ  ’Ü    cšÙÿ  lcšÙÿ      M „P'       L
    Short stack dump:
    <-ksedsts()+315<-ksdxfstk()+32<-ksdxcb()+1764<-sspuser()+112<-__restore_rt()<-semtimedop()+10<-sskgpwwait()+265<-skgpwwait()+156<-ksliwat()+1546<-kslwaitctx()+162<-kjusuc()+3868<-ksipgetctx()+1456<-ksqcmi()+22853<-ksqgtlctx()+4311<-ksqgelctx()+601<-ktcwit1()+333<-ktbgtl0()+1321<-kdimod0()+4581<-kdiblLockPiece()+968<-kdiblLockRange()+1639<-kdiblcfls()+189<-kdiblFinish1()+978<-kdibliFinish()+73<-kxibDoFinish()+90<-kxibFinish()+431<-qerltcEndLoadProcessing()+614<-qerltcLoadStateMachine()+858<-qerltcInsertValues()+218<-qerltcFetch()+1373<-insexe()+1095<-opiexe()+5609<-opiodr()+1220<-ttcpip()+1227<-opitsk()+1449<-opiino()+1026<-opiodr()+1220<-opidrv()+580<-sou2o()+90<-opimai_real()+145<-ssthrdmain()+177<-main()+215<-__libc_start_main()+244<-_start()+41
    Global blockers dump start:---------------------------------
    DUMP LOCAL BLOCKER/HOLDER: block level 3 res [0x2a001d][0x1cb9d],[TX]
    ----------resource 0x1341d3c30----------------------
    resname : [0x2a001d][0x1cb9d],[TX]
    Local node : 4
    dir_node : 4
    master_node : 4
    hv idx : 14
    hv last r.inc : 32
    current inc : 32
    hv status : 0
    hv master : 4
    open options : dd
    grant_bits : KJUSERNL KJUSEREX
    grant mode : KJUSERNL KJUSERCR KJUSERCW KJUSERPR KJUSERPW KJUSEREX
    count : 3 0 0 0 0 1
    val_state : KJUSERVS_NOVALUE
    valblk : 0x5f4f4354532c504d505f524543565f4f OCTS,PMPRECV_O
    access_node : 4
    vbreq_state : 0
    state : x0
    resp : 0x1341d3c30
    On Scan_q? : N
    Total accesses: 8568
    Imm. accesses: 7210
    Granted_locks : 1
    Cvting_locks : 3
    value_block: 5f 4f 43 54 53 2c 50 4d 50 5f 52 45 43 56 5f 4f
    GRANTED_Q :
    lp 0x1537feef8 gl KJUSEREX rp 0x1341d3c30 [0x2a001d][0x1cb9d],[TX]
    master 4 gl owner 0x154b13128 possible pid 4540 xid 39000-0005-00048D1F bast 0 rseq 1329 mseq 0 history 0x14951495
    open opt KJUSERDEADLOCK
    CONVERT_Q:
    lp 0x1537ff0a8 gl KJUSERNL rl KJUSERPR rp 0x1341d3c30 [0x2a001d][0x1cb9d],[TX]
    master 4 gl owner 0x155b0dd28 possible pid 12781 xid 37000-0005-00082EBC bast 0 rseq 1329 mseq 0 history 0x49a5149a
    convert opt KJUSERGETVALUE
    lp 0x1513ef168 gl KJUSERNL rl KJUSERPR rp 0x1341d3c30 [0x2a001d][0x1cb9d],[TX]
    master 4 gl owner 0x159aaf240 possible pid 1347 xid 48000-0005-0001FACA bast 0 rseq 1329 mseq 0 history 0x49a5149a
    convert opt KJUSERGETVALUE
    lp 0x15365e060 gl KJUSERNL rl KJUSERPR rp 0x1341d3c30 [0x2a001d][0x1cb9d],[TX]
    master 4 gl owner 0x154b105e0 possible pid 8601 xid 47000-0005-00024CDE bast 0 rseq 1329 mseq 0 history 0x49a5149a
    convert opt KJUSERGETVALUE
    ----------enqueue 0x1537feef8------------------------
    lock version : 2128337
    Owner node : 4
    grant_level : KJUSEREX
    req_level : KJUSEREX
    bast_level : KJUSERNL
    notify_func : (nil)
    resp : 0x1341d3c30
    procp : 0x1510e0ee0
    pid : 12781
    proc version : 10700
    oprocp : (nil)
    opid : 0
    group lock owner : 0x154b13128
    possible pid : 4540
    xid : 39000-0005-00048D1F
    dd_time : 0.0 secs
    dd_count : 0
    timeout : 0.0 secs
    On_timer_q? : N
    On_dd_q? : N
    lock_state : GRANTED
    Open Options : KJUSERDEADLOCK
    Convert options : KJUSERNOQUEUE KJUSERNODEADLOCKWAIT
    History : 0x14951495
    Msg_Seq : 0x0
    res_seq : 1329
    valblk : 0x2c3a504d505f504f4c4943595f444953 ,:PMP_POLICY_DIS
    DUMP LOCAL BLOCKER: initiate state dump for DEADLOCK
    possible owner[57.4540] on resource TX-002A001D-0001CB9D
    *** 2012-10-09 03:40:32.794
    Submitting asynchronized dump request [28]
    DUMP LOCAL BLOCKER/HOLDER: block level 3 res [0x2f0003][0x1eee9],[TX]
    ----------resource 0x1355e6868----------------------
    resname : [0x2f0003][0x1eee9],[TX]
    Local node : 4
    dir_node : 4
    master_node : 4
    hv idx : 64
    hv last r.inc : 32
    current inc : 32
    hv status : 0
    hv master : 4
    open options : dd
    grant_bits : KJUSERNL KJUSEREX
    grant mode : KJUSERNL KJUSERCR KJUSERCW KJUSERPR KJUSERPW KJUSEREX
    count : 1 0 0 0 0 1
    val_state : KJUSERVS_NOVALUE
    valblk : 0x5f4f4354532c504de00e0e5101000000 _OCTS,PMQ
    access_node : 4
    vbreq_state : 0
    state : x0
    resp : 0x1355e6868
    On Scan_q? : N
    Total accesses: 13955
    Imm. accesses: 11923
    Granted_locks : 1
    Cvting_locks : 1
    value_block: 5f 4f 43 54 53 2c 50 4d e0 0e 0e 51 01 00 00 00
    GRANTED_Q :
    lp 0x1528de2e0 gl KJUSEREX rp 0x1355e6868 [0x2f0003][0x1eee9],[TX]
    master 4 gl owner 0x154b105e0 possible pid 8601 xid 47000-0005-00024CDE bast 0 rseq 1980 mseq 0 history 0x49a51495
    open opt KJUSERDEADLOCK
    CONVERT_Q:
    lp 0x1528de490 gl KJUSERNL rl KJUSERPR rp 0x1355e6868 [0x2f0003][0x1eee9],[TX]
    master 4 gl owner 0x154b13128 possible pid 4540 xid 39000-0005-00048D1F bast 0 rseq 1980 mseq 0 history 0x49a5149a
    convert opt KJUSERGETVALUE
    ----------enqueue 0x1528de2e0------------------------
    lock version : 2643245
    Owner node : 4
    grant_level : KJUSEREX
    req_level : KJUSEREX
    bast_level : KJUSERNL
    notify_func : (nil)
    resp : 0x1355e6868
    procp : 0x1510f9800
    pid : 4540
    proc version : 21634
    oprocp : (nil)
    opid : 0
    group lock owner : 0x154b105e0
    possible pid : 8601
    xid : 47000-0005-00024CDE
    dd_time : 0.0 secs
    dd_count : 0
    timeout : 0.0 secs
    On_timer_q? : N
    On_dd_q? : N
    lock_state : GRANTED
    Open Options : KJUSERDEADLOCK
    Convert options : KJUSERNOQUEUE KJUSERNODEADLOCKWAIT
    History : 0x49a51495
    Msg_Seq : 0x0
    res_seq : 1980
    valblk : 0x2c3a504d505f504f4c4943595f444953 ,:PMP_POLICY_DIS
    DUMP LOCAL BLOCKER: initiate state dump for DEADLOCK
    possible owner[71.8601] on resource TX-002F0003-0001EEE9
    *** 2012-10-09 03:40:32.794
    Submitting asynchronized dump request [28]
    Global blockers dump end:-----------------------------------
    Global Wait-For-Graph(WFG) at ddTS[0.108ea] :
    BLOCKED 0x15365e060 3 wq 2 cvtops x1 TX 0x2a001d.0x1cb9d [47000-0005-00024CDE] 4
    BLOCKER 0x1537feef8 3 wq 1 cvtops x28 TX 0x2a001d.0x1cb9d [39000-0005-00048D1F] 4
    BLOCKED 0x1528de490 3 wq 2 cvtops x1 TX 0x2f0003.0x1eee9 [39000-0005-00048D1F] 4
    BLOCKER 0x1528de2e0 3 wq 1 cvtops x28 TX 0x2f0003.0x1eee9 [47000-0005-00024CDE] 4

    Your scenario involves mode 4 (KJUSERPR) and mode 6 (KJUSEREX) TX locks.
    Mode 4 (S) TX locks can have a few causes, including ITLs, unique indexes and bitmap indexes.
    It could be a very similar scenario to this recent thread where the situation was primary/unique key collisions from inserts on different nodes:
    Re: Cause of Deadlock

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention in AWR reports

    Dears,
    One of my friends asked me to give him a help on analyzing a performance problem they are experimenting from time to time. First of all I am sorry to tell you that he didn’t gave me a lot of information. I will share with you all what I have been sent and would like to have your precious advice according to the available information.
    It is a third party software installed on oracle data base 10.2.0.4.0. He said that from time to time the application hangs. He sends me an AWR reports supplied by the local DBA. Unfortunately, the local DBA send only the AWR information he thinks are most important to be looked at (he did not include the load profile and the instance efficiency Percentages part in this AWR for example).
    Here below is the available information I can share with you
                                                                             Snap time                                       sessions        cursors/session
    Begin Snap        09-mars-11 08:00:03              31                     6.5
    End Snap          09-mars-11 08:39:49              41                     9.8
    Elapsed           39.77 (mins)
    DB Time           536.65(mins)
    Top 5 Timed Events
    Event                          Waits   Time(s)    Avg Wait(ms)    % Total Call Time     Wait Class
    enq: TX - row lock contention  8,468    25,344       2,993            78.7             Application
    read by other session          714,628   4,604         6               14.3             User I/O
    db file sequential read        323,264  1,977         6               6.1              User I/O
    CPU time                                 171                          .5
    db file scattered read          1,885   49           26               .2               User I/OThe AWR reports presents also the following SQL statement as the top SQL of its ‘’SQL ordered by Elapsed Time’’ part
    UPDATE xxxx.table1
       SET col1 = :1,
           col2 = :2,
           col3 = :3,
           col4 = :4,
    WHERE ID = :13
    AND colx  = :14;And the following sql at its “SQL ordered by Reads’ part
    SELECT t1.*
    FROM xxxx.table1 t1
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table2 t2
           ON t1.id = t2.id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table3 t3
           ON t1.id = t3.id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table4 t4
           ON t1.id = t4.id
    WHERE t1.col1 = :1
    AND   t1.col2 IN (:2,:3, :4);And finally in the Segments by Row Lock Waits part of the AWR I have this:
    Owner      tablespace name    object name   object type   row lock waits   %of capture
    xxxx          xxxx          table1         TABLE          54       100    There are no bitmap indexes on this OLTP data base. There are no unindexed foreign keys and it seems that there are no selects done over a dblink.
    I am waiting to have the table table1 script and its indexes
    Given those information I think that the locking problem is due to this update on table table1 which is not followed immediately by a commit or a rollback. But, instead, several selects that might be taking a long time are done before reaching the commit that ends the lock on the table table1
    What do you think about the possible reason of this lock?
    Thanks in advance
    Mohamed Houri

    Dears,
    I did get the suspected query and asked for its several explain plans thanks to the dbms_xplan.display_awr. The most important thing to point out is that the last where clause of this query seems to be dynamically filled-up
    SELECT t1.*
    FROM xxxx.table1 t1
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table2 t2
           ON t1.id = t2.id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table3 t3
           ON t1.id = t3.id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table4 t4
           ON t1.id = t4.id
    WHERE t1.col1 = :1
    AND   t1.col2 in (:2 , :3 , :4 , :5 , :6 , :7 , :8 )
    | Id  | Operation                      | Name                    | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |             
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT               |                         |       |       |    14 (100)|          |             
    |   1 |  NESTED LOOPS OUTER            |                         |     1 |   280 |    14   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   2 |   NESTED LOOPS OUTER           |                         |     1 |   226 |     9   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   3 |    NESTED LOOPS OUTER          |                         |     1 |   216 |     6   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   4 |     TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TABLE1                  |     1 |   141 |     4   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   5 |      INDEX RANGE SCAN          | SYS_C0010893            |     1 |       |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   6 |     TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TABLE2                  |     1 |    75 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   7 |      INDEX UNIQUE SCAN         | SYS_C0010774            |     1 |       |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   8 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN            | SYS_C0010896            |     3 |    30 |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |   9 |   TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID  | TABLE3                  |    11 |   594 |     5   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    |  10 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN            | SYS_C0010910            |    11 |       |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |             
    SELECT t1.*
    FROM xxxx.table1 t1
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table2 t2
           ON t1.id = t2.id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table3 t3
           ON t1.id = t3.id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN xxxx.table4 t4
           ON t1.id = t4.id
    WHERE t1.col1 = :1
    AND   t1.col2 in (:2 , :3 , :4 , :5 , :6 , :7 , :8 , :9 , :10 , :11 , :12 , :13 , :14 , :15 , :16 ,                       
    :17 , :18 , :19 , :20 , :21 , :22 , :23 , :24 , :25 , :26 , :27 , :28 , :29 , :30 , :31 , :32 ,                        
    :33 , :34 , :35 , :36 , :37 , :38 , :39 , :40 , :41 , :42 , :43 , :44 , :45 , :46 , :47 , :48 ,                        
    :251 , :252 , :253 , :254 , :255 , :256 , :257 )  ;
    | Id  | Operation                       | Name                    | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |            
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                |                         |       |       |  5943 (100)|          |            
    |   1 |  NESTED LOOPS OUTER             |                         |  9210 |  2536K|  5943   (1)| 00:01:12 |            
    |   2 |   NESTED LOOPS OUTER            |                         |   885 |   195K|  1784   (0)| 00:00:22 |            
    |   3 |    NESTED LOOPS OUTER           |                         |   255 | 55080 |  1019   (0)| 00:00:13 |            
    |   4 |     INLIST ITERATOR             |                         |       |       |            |          |            
    |   5 |      TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TABLE1                  |   255 | 35955 |   509   (0)| 00:00:07 |            
    |   6 |       INDEX UNIQUE SCAN         | SYS_C0010893            |   255 |       |   258   (0)| 00:00:04 |            
    |   7 |     TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TABLE2                  |     1 |    75 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |            
    |   8 |      INDEX UNIQUE SCAN          | SYS_C0010774            |     1 |       |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |            
    |   9 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN             | SYS_C0010896            |     3 |    30 |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |            
    |  10 |   TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID   | TABLE3                  |    10 |   560 |     5   (0)| 00:00:01 |            
    |  11 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN             | FK_TABLE3               |    10 |       |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |            
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------   Suddenly there is an INLIST ITERATOR that pops up and which seems to be started 255 times and the ‘quick’ query which in normal situation (small in list) executes in less than 1 second starts now taking more than 1 minute to complete.
    As far as it is a third party software, they can’t change the query.
    Do you have any idea on how to solve this problem?
    Here below are the optimizer parameters
    SQL> show parameter optimizer
    NAME                                 TYPE        VALUE
    optimizer_dynamic_sampling           integer     2
    optimizer_features_enable            string      10.2.0.4
    optimizer_index_caching              integer     0
    optimizer_index_cost_adj             integer     100
    optimizer_mode                       string      ALL_ROWS
    optimizer_secure_view_merging        boolean     TRUEThanks in advance
    Mohamed Houri

  • Enq: TX - row lock contention in Select without for update

    We have deployed a new Version of our Software on the test-system of our customer.
    While the software runs fine on our Systems (Oracle EE 10.2.0.4 as well as Oracle EE 11.2.0.2 on EL 5.4 x86_64) it runs sluggish on our Customer's system (Oracle EE 10.2.0.4 on Solaris 10 x64).
    During analysis of the problem I came across this:
    SQL ID:  Plan Hash: 3934983510
    SELECT ts.message_id_t235
      FROM t235_time_series ts,
           t238_timeseries_reported tsr
    WHERE ts.time_series_id_t235 = tsr.timeseries_id_t238
       AND tsr.message_id_t238 = :b2
       AND ts.current_state_t235 = :b1
       AND ROWNUM = 1
    call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
    ======= ======  ======== ========== ========== ========== ==========  ==========
    Parse        0      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
    Execute      8      0.01     *137.55*          0          8          5           0
    Fetch        8      0.00       0.00          0         60          0           8
    ======= ======  ======== ========== ========== ========== ==========  ==========
    total       16      0.01     137.55          0         68          5           8
    Misses in library cache during parse: 0
    Optimizer mode: CHOOSE
    Parsing user id: 90     (recursive depth: 1)
    Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
      Event waited on                             Times   Max. Wait  Total Waited
      ========================================   Waited  ==========  ============
      *enq:* *TX* *=* *row* *lock* *contention*                 281        0.64        *137.01*
    ********************************************************************************As you can see the statement is very primitive. The Tables used are very huge (100M+ Rows) but have no bitmap indexes. How can this statement wait on enq: TX = row lock contention?
    Thanks in advance!
    Best regards,
    Sven
    Edited by: user12182396 on Feb 4, 2011 5:43 AM
    Edited by: user12182396 on Feb 4, 2011 6:02 AM

    user12182396 wrote:
    We have deployed a new Version of our Software on the test-system of our customer.
    While the software runs fine on our Systems (Oracle EE 10.2.0.4 as well as Oracle EE 11.2.0.2 on EL 5.4 x86_64) it runs sluggish on our Customer's system (Oracle EE 10.2.0.4 on Solaris 10 x64).
    During analysis of the problem I came across this:
    SQL ID:  Plan Hash: 3934983510
    SELECT ts.message_id_t235
    FROM t235_time_series ts,
    t238_timeseries_reported tsr
    WHERE ts.time_series_id_t235 = tsr.timeseries_id_t238
    AND tsr.message_id_t238 = :b2
    AND ts.current_state_t235 = :b1
    AND ROWNUM = 1
    call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
    ======= ======  ======== ========== ========== ========== ==========  ==========
    Parse        0      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
    Execute      8      0.01     *137.55*          0          8          5           0
    Fetch        8      0.00       0.00          0         60          0           8
    ======= ======  ======== ========== ========== ========== ==========  ==========
    total       16      0.01     137.55          0         68          5           8
    Misses in library cache during parse: 0
    Optimizer mode: CHOOSE
    Parsing user id: 90     (recursive depth: 1)
    Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
    Event waited on                             Times   Max. Wait  Total Waited
    ========================================   Waited  ==========  ============
    *enq:* *TX* *=* *row* *lock* *contention*                 281        0.64        *137.01*
    ******************************************************************************** As you can see the statement is very primitive. The Tables used are very huge (100M+ Rows) but have no bitmap indexes. How can this statement wait on enq: TX = row lock contention?
    Are either of these tables subject to distributed transactions through database links ? If so then it is possible for a select statement to wait on a TX enqueue in mode 4 if it's trying to read a block which is subject to change by another tranaction that is stuck between the PREPARE and COMMIT phases of a "2 phase commit".
    However, I have to say that don't know whether this would show up as: "enq: TX - row lock contention" or "enq: TX - contention". If you monitor the system for a while - checking v$lock for lock types TX, or query v$active_session_history (if you're licensed to use it) you may be able to check the lock mode.
    If this is the problem then it's generally indicative of a networking problem of some sort - possibly simple congestion because of excess traffic.
    Regards
    Jonathan Lewis
    http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
    http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
    To post code, statspack/AWR report, execution plans or trace files, START and END the text with the tag {noformat}{noformat} (the word "code" in lowercase, curly brackets, no spaces) so that the text appears in fixed format.
    There is a +"Preview"+ tab at the top of the text entry panel. Use this to check what your message will look like before you post the message. If it looks a complete mess you're unlikely to get a response. (Click on the +"Plain text"+ tab if you want to edit the text to tidy it up.)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

Maybe you are looking for

  • ERROR WHILE executing susbsititution variable in 11.1.3

    Facing error while executing the susbsititution variable inside the fix command IN 11.1.3 FIX(&CURRVERSION,COLA) Unit=units*5; dataexport "file" "," "E:\NEW.TXT"; ENDFIX Error throws delimiter not balanced (]) inside the fix statement When i used the

  • Brand new ipod touch without january upgrade features included?!

    I just bought my ipod sunday, it has john lennon on the box, model #A1213. I dont recall what firmware it came with but I updated it to 1.1.4 as instructed by itunes summary page. Also I get an ad on start up of itunes to purchase the january upgrade

  • How do I rename a volume on an external hard drive

    I have a 500 GB Iomega USB external hard drive divided into 3 volumes. The largest one used to be my Time Machine backup, but I needed more room and have added a new drive for the purpose and want to change the name of the old backup volume to someth

  • An Oracle OCCI program compiled in Win 7 x86 VC++10 crashes in a Win XP Sp3

    Hi: I generated a VC++ program in my computer under Win 7 32bits linked to Oracle Instant Client OCCI 11.2.0.3 library. It works very well in my machine when selecting data from a database but, when I copy this executable together with oraocci11.dll

  • MBP running Leopard 10.5.3 and W XP  with freezing problems

    Hello everyone Im running Leopard 10.5.3 and bootcamp 2.1 on my MBP. I am able to run xp pro only once in a blue moon. Ever since I started using bootcamp with windows xp sp2 the computer freezes up. I always have to reboot the computer in order to u