On 15-Sep-2015 14:17 -0600, Raul A Jager W wrote:
Checking the programs I found one that had a "select" (under
commitment) and it may have returned without releasing the record. I
added "with NC" to the select, and since then I had no more records
locked, but because the problem appeared very seldom, I am not sure
if that was the solution.

Is it possible that the "select" was locking the records? I have
"commit" or "rollback" on every update, but the "select" was alone.

Yes. A SELECT cursor would have locked the selected rows, in order to effect the requested isolation; according to the defaulted or specified isolation-level\commitment-control-lock-level. Adding the WITH NC clause would ensure that the statement does not participate in the transaction\unit-of-work, so the COMMIT or ROLLBACK would not be required to release the row-locks.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.