11.5 locking

Hey gurus, How does 11.5 control updates to the same record coming from two different boxes? I was told it doesn't do all the locking that Oracle RAC does, so does that mean there is a possible issue with an update on a secondary being rejected because the same record is being updated on the primary?

Hi Kate, I believe IDS cathes thos errors with a new error number and message EVERCONFLICT Kidn regards, Rob Prop "KATE TOMCHIK" <kate_tomchik@homedepot.com> Sent by: ids-bounces@iiug.org 06/19/2008 04:10 PM Please respond to ids@iiug.org To ids@iiug.org cc Subject 11.5 locking [12462] Hey gurus, How does 11.5 control updates to the same record coming from two different boxes? I was told it doesn't do all the locking that Oracle RAC does, so does that mean there is a possible issue with an update on a secondary being rejected because the same record is being updated on the primary? ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

Updates through the secondaries are actually passed to the primary by the secondary through a direct connection from the secondary to the primary. Once the primary acks the update the secondary driving the update updates it's own cache copy and the primary notifies all of the secondaries that that disk page has become invalid if it's in cache. Then the primary replicates the change, just like any other update. Therefore, the issues of updating a single row from multiple secondaries are EXACTLY like updating the same row by multiple clients on the primary, except that 11.50 has the new timestamp feature that can be used to more easily and cheaply implement verified updates or optimistic locking protocols than in earlier versions. To be specific, the locking is still being done on the primary just like if you were updating directly to the primary. Art On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 10:05 AM, KATE TOMCHIK <kate_tomchik@homedepot.com> wrote: > Hey gurus, How does 11.5 control updates to the same record coming from two > different boxes? I was told it doesn't do all the locking that Oracle RAC > does, so does that mean there is a possible issue with an update on a > secondary being rejected because the same record is being updated on the > primary? > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > -- Art S. Kagel Oninit (www.oninit.com) IIUG Board of Directors (art@iiug.org) Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on my employer, Oninit, the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly or implicitly. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves.