On 11/09/18 00:48, Svein Erling Tysvær setys...@gmail.com [firebird-support] wrote: > Hi Hamish! > > What exactly do you mean by "The queries kind of don't > actually conflict"? If they're trying to MERGE into the same row > simultaneously, then they do actually conflict, even if they contain > the same values. Strictly speaking, I think you have a 'lock conflict' > and not a 'deadlock' (a proper deadlock would be more if transaction A > has updated record a and waits to update record b, when transaction B > has updated record b and waits to update record a). > > One way to solve lock conflicts can sometimes be to insert into a > separate table (never update) and then have a separate batch process > that goes through this table and updates the real tables monthly, > daily or every hour. But I've no idea whether this is of any help in > your situation.
Hi Set, I mean that at high level they don't conflict because they write the same values. From Firebird's point of view obviously they do conflict. I say a deadlock because that is what is being reported by Firebird in the error message; SQLCODE: -913 - deadlock - update conflicts with concurrent update - concurrent transaction number is 22464 Unfortunately your journal / batch update solution doesn't help in my case. Thanks for the suggestion though. Hamish
