just to make sure -- does the database have the new value and the snapshot has 
the old, or vice versa?

ms

On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Ken Anderson wrote:

> It's Oracle RAC, so yes, a cluster.
> 
> Yes, I'm REALLY sure it's single threaded.
> 
> Yes, no way for someone else to change those rows, since we audit the tables 
> with a trigger, and they weren't modified by anything else. 
> 
> The data type of the trans_id column is Number (12,0)
> 
> Ken
> 
> On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:37 PM, Miguel Arroz wrote:
> 
>> Hi!
>> 
>> What kind of DB are you using? Is it a single server, or a cluster?
>> 
>> Are you REALLY sure it's single threaded (although that should not make a 
>> difference, because OL doesn't work anyway ;) )?
>> 
>> Are you REALLY sure no other app, person, alien, cosmic ray, etc, is 
>> changing the conflicting rows at the same time?
>> 
>> (Not my suggestion, but really good point ;) ) What is the data type of the 
>> column you use for locking?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Miguel Arroz
>> 
>> On 2010/09/24, at 16:56, Ken Anderson wrote:
>> 
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> I have an odd problem I'm wondering if anyone else has seen before.
>>> 
>>> I have apps that do high throughput processing of data - many times a 
>>> second.  It is single threaded, and uses a single EOF stack.  I'm sure it's 
>>> single threaded because the requests are coming in via an inbound queue, 
>>> not any kind of front end.
>>> 
>>> Every once in a while under significantly high load, I get a few optimistic 
>>> lock exceptions in a row, on rows that are only being touched by this app.  
>>> We audit every update, and I can look into the audit tables and verify that 
>>> nothing else has modified the record except this app.
>>> 
>>> It's almost like the snapshot has not been recorded properly before the 
>>> next request is processed, so EOF thinks something else updated the value.
>>> 
>>> Our locking is implemented on a single column, trans_id, which is updated 
>>> with every save.  The audit table also saves the trans_id that's 
>>> responsible for moving the record into audit, and all the values match in 
>>> succession.
>>> 
>>> Has anyone had anything like this happen?  Running 5.4.3 on Linux.  and 
>>> no... no Wonder.
>>> 
>>> Ken _______________________________________________
>>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/arroz%40guiamac.com
>>> 
>>> This email sent to [email protected]
>> 
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mschrag%40pobox.com
> 
> This email sent to [email protected]

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to