Session2: DELETE TABLE2, DELETE TABLE1 ... 此时碰巧可能出现互相持有对方需要的资源,导致deadlock。 对于这种情况,可能的解决方法就是:将表的顺序改为一致,或者拆分更小的事务,避免较差更新的情况。 另外,对于批量更新,和上面一个事务中多个表操作的原理相同,并发大则也会导致deadlock。要么减少并发,要么不用批...
由于外键约束问题导致ORA-00060错误,报Single resource deadlock [TM]处理过程 这个问题持续很久,当时看到global_enqueue_deadlock,没有多看,直接认为是全局死锁,需要业务自己协调,从trace文件中拿来一个delete的SQL 但是后来偶然机会让辅助监控的工程师负责再看看该问题,确发现是另一回事。 当时的trace文件内容如下 死锁...
update eg_60 set txt='ses2' where num=1 * ERROR at line 1: ORA-00060: deadlock detected while waiting for resource Session1的update eg_60 set txt='ses1' where num=2;仍处hang状态,此时Session2执行exit正常退出,则 Session1: update eg_60 set txt='ses1' where num=2; 1 row updated....
delete from wdz1 where wdz1id=1 这时候,程序会死锁,报错ORA-00060,除非上面的对从表的数据操作提交事务或者回滚事务。 2. 具体原因分析 一个数据表的外键主要有3种方式来维护它自己和主表数据的一致性。 (1)delete cascade 例子如下: alter table WDZ2 add constraint XXX foreign key (WDZ1ID) references...
delete from ALARMINFO where ALARMNUMBER=:1 End of information on OTHER waiting sessions. Current SQL statement for this session: update ALARMINFO set ADAPTERNAME=:1, ALARMCAUSE=:2, CLEARABLE=:3, ISCLEARED=:4, INSERTTIME=:5, ALARMLEVEL=:6, PROBABLECAUSE=:7, source=:8, ALARMOBJECT=:9, ...
a. unindexed foreign keys in a system that issues a delete against the parent table OR updates the parent primary key. b. use of bitmap indexes on tables that are modifed "in real time". the next big one: c. application design flaw the last, mostly rare - but can happen ...
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER cmsinfo AFTER delete ON tablea for each row BEGIN IF DELETING THEN INSERT INTO tableb values(:old.id); end if; END cmsinfo ; 这是执行删除的话会报ORA-04091错误 ORA-04091:表 tablea 发生了变化, 触发器/函数不能读它 网络上找了一下说是要自治事物,修改触发器如下...
a. unindexed foreign keys in a system that issues a delete against the parent table OR updates the parent primary key. b. use of bitmap indexes on tables that are modifed "in real time". the next big one: c. application design flaw ...
ora-00060:deadlock detected while waiting for resource 背景:A中有三个字段A1,A2,A3,A表 PK为A1,A2组合主键。B中有三个字段A1,A2,B3,B表中的FK引用表A中的PK。在并发的请发下执行系列业务逻辑: step1:开始事务 step2:delete B step3:delete A step4:提交事务在高
ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_STATS", line 28795ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_STATS", line 31599 The following recursive SQL may be involved in the deadlock delete /*+ dynamic_sampling(4) */ from sys.wri$_optstat_histgrm_history where savtime < :1 and rownum <= NVL(:2, rownum)ChangesCause...