Lock owner not found issue - between parenthesis

Hello, friends. (IDS 11.50.FC6W1 on a linux_64 machine) It seems really a silly question, if not a "strange" one, like I´m thinking, but here it is: My table, with lots of users are indicating these current locks: Locks address wtlist owner lklist type tblsnum rowid key#/bsiz 4823d060 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823cfe0 HDR+IX 800023 0 0 4823d0e0 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823d060 HDR+X 800023 18df830d 0 What I really can´t find is the owner (ae4aaa68), onstat -u doesn´t have this owner, and I can´t figure out who´s doing the table lock. Can someone give me any help? Thanks a lot!

original post: Hello, friends. (IDS 11.50.FC6W1 on a linux_64 machine) It seems really a silly question, if not a "strange" one, like I´m thinking, but here it is: My table, with lots of users are indicating these current locks: Locks address wtlist owner lklist type tblsnum rowid key#/bsiz 4823d060 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823cfe0 HDR+IX 800023 0 0 4823d0e0 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823d060 HDR+X 800023 18df830d 0 What I really can´t find is the owner (ae4aaa68), onstat -u doesn´t have this owner, and I can´t figure out who´s doing the table lock. Can someone give me any help? Thanks a lot! Response: Lock owners inside ()'s indicate a global transaction. So that address won't show up in an onstat -u output, but should show up in onstat -x output instead. So it would appear your system is doing some sort of XA type transactions, and there is a global transaction that owns those locks, rather then a regular user from onstat -u. Jacques Renaut IBM Informix Advanced Support APD Team

original post: Hello, friends. (IDS 11.50.FC6W1 on a linux_64 machine) It seems really a silly question, if not a "strange" one, like I´m thinking, but here it is: My table, with lots of users are indicating these current locks: Locks address wtlist owner lklist type tblsnum rowid key#/bsiz 4823d060 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823cfe0 HDR+IX 800023 0 0 4823d0e0 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823d060 HDR+X 800023 18df830d 0 What I really can´t find is the owner (ae4aaa68), onstat -u doesn´t have this owner, and I can´t figure out who´s doing the table lock. Can someone give me any help? Thanks a lot! Response: Lock owners inside ()'s indicate a global transaction. So that address won't show up in an onstat -u output, but should show up in onstat -x output instead. So it would appear your system is doing some sort of XA type transactions, and there is a global transaction that owns those locks, rather then a regular user from onstat -u. Jacques Renaut IBM Informix Advanced Support APD Team Further clarification: No only are global transactions involved, to get the lock owner inside ()'s, but the owning global transaction would not have a user currently attached to it, otherwise that user would be reported as the owner. Jacques Renaut IBM Informix Advanced Support APD Team

Mr Jacques, thanks a lot for your explanations, I identified the XA transaction, over the logical-logs, and found out the issue on the application! Best regards, and thanks again. Em 20/04/2011 09:41, JACQUES RENAUT escreveu: > original post: > Hello, friends. > (IDS 11.50.FC6W1 on a linux_64 machine) > It seems really a silly question, if not a "strange" one, like I´m thinking, > but here it is: > > My table, with lots of users are indicating these current locks: > Locks > address wtlist owner lklist type tblsnum rowid key#/bsiz > 4823d060 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823cfe0 HDR+IX 800023 0 0 > 4823d0e0 0 (ae4aaa68) 4823d060 HDR+X 800023 18df830d 0 > > What I really can´t find is the owner (ae4aaa68), onstat -u doesn´t have this > owner, and I can´t figure out who´s doing the table lock. > > Can someone give me any help? > Thanks a lot! > > Response: > > Lock owners inside ()'s indicate a global transaction. So that address won't > show up in an onstat -u output, but should show up in onstat -x output > instead. So it would appear your system is doing some sort of XA type > transactions, and there is a global transaction that owns those locks, rather > then a regular user from onstat -u. > > Jacques Renaut > IBM Informix Advanced Support > APD Team > > Further clarification: > No only are global transactions involved, to get the lock owner inside ()'s, > but the owning global transaction would not have a user currently attached to > it, otherwise that user would be reported as the owner. > > Jacques Renaut > IBM Informix Advanced Support > APD Team > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > -- Alexandre Marini Tecnologia da Informação - DBA msn: alexandre_marini@hotmail.com SEFAZ-MS / SGI-UGSR / Sistemas IBM-Informix Cert-Info-Mgmt_color <Cert-Info-Mgmt_color.jpg> IBM Certified System Administrator - Informix Dynamic Server V10 / V11 <http://www.iiug.org/conf/2011/iiug/>;