Re: ovlock=56

In article <5m39a2$nfu@camel1.mindspring.com>, Larry Foote <lfoote@pipeline.com> writes >ogolde@impsat1.com.ar (Oscar Goldes) wrote: > >>Hello, >>running onstat on Informix Online 7.2 I noticed the value >>ovlock=56 >>after two days up. > >>Is this value acceptable? Or should it be 0? >It is best to prevent lock overflow from occurring during normal >processing. > Agreed - every time ovlocks goes up the session that tries to exceed the number of available locks gets an error... >>The value of LOCKS is 60000 >>What happens when a process needs a lock and there are no more available? The update/insert/delete/select FAILS and an error code is returned to the apllication. >I suggest bumping locks up to at least 200000. It takes a little more 1 lock = ~43 bytes therefore 10,000 locks = roughly 1/2 Mb of memory. Since you are only getting occasional ovlocks I would try 100,000 locks i.e. increase memory usage by 40,000 locks = 2Mb. If you still get ovlocks then kep increasing by 40,000 until they stop happening. >memory but not much. If you keep getting lock overflow (ovlock > 0) >and still have available memory, then make it larger. If a there are >no more locks available you will get a lock overflow and something >will usually get rolled back. If you are doing a large update or >insert to a table, I would lock the table first. > Agreed - LOCK TABLE tab1 IN EXCLUSIVE MODE first. >>I have also found >>lockwaits=245 > >>Does this refer to the number of times a process had to wait for a locked >>resource, or the number of times it had to wait for an available lock? >I believe this indicates the number of times a process has had to wait >for a locked table or a locked row. If there are no available locks >you will get a lock overflow. > Correct - it is the time of times a process had to wait for a locked resource. >>Thanks in advance. >>-- Oscar Goldes >>-- Orden Argentina SA > > -- David Williams