Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
psfaro
Starting Member
49 Posts |
 Posted - 2011-03-07 : 07:45:11
|
| Hi,My apps generates a Deadlock , and MSSQL makes a Victim and executes ROLLBACK automatically , for all the trasaction that the "Victim" issued.Is it Possible to configure MSSQL to solve the Deadlock , without ROLLBACK the victim transaction ?.I want that "ROLLBACK " is made by the program, not for MSSQL.REgards Pedro Faro |
|
|
Lumbago
Norsk Yak Master
3271 Posts |
Posted - 2011-03-07 : 08:22:47
|
| A deadlock is a conflict between two or more transactions in the database, and this can not be handled by an application. How is the database going to handle a deadlock without choosing a victim? Deadlocks can be avoided by indexing the tables involved properly.- LumbagoMy blog-> http://thefirstsql.com/2011/02/07/regular-expressions-advanced-string-matching-and-new-split-function-sql-server-2008-r2/ |
 |
|
|
Sachin.Nand
2937 Posts |
Posted - 2011-03-07 : 08:49:54
|
| Set the following trace flag to understand what exactly is causing the deadlock.DBCC TRACEON (1204,-1)PBUH |
|
|
|
psfaro
Starting Member
49 Posts |
Posted - 2011-03-07 : 12:16:49
|
| Hi,In apps that Updates too much data in a process(about 50 000 records), if someone update data in the same table , ocassionaly can be happen one deadlock.The apps is prepared to deal with this situation , since it begin and commit/rrolbak the tansaction if anything failed.Unfortunaly , MSSQL in a deadlock , ROLLBACK the victim transaction , and whe the apps detects that exists an error an try to rollback, there is not a Begin Trasaction issued.Of course , i understand the "killing of the victim" , but what i need is that MSSQL doesn't rollback the transaction , but only kill the victim , to the app rollback the transaction .I don't know if this is possible ? |
|
|
|
denis_the_thief
Aged Yak Warrior
596 Posts |
Posted - 2011-03-07 : 14:07:36
|
| The victim must be rolled back or this would leave the Database at an inconsistent state. SQL Server can't transfer the responsibility to issue a Rollback to some other Application. Otherwise it would have to wait in a Deadlock state until the other Application issued a Rollback, without knowing how long that would be nor a guarantee that it would be completed. |
|
|
|
psfaro
Starting Member
49 Posts |
Posted - 2011-03-07 : 15:10:00
|
| Hi ,Ok. i Understand.I'll deal the problem with some changes on code.I know that sometime a deadlock can ocurr , but it's not due to a index not optimized .In cenarios like updating to much data envolved on a transaction , it can happen,Tanxs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deadlock