Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

Interfere to Deadlock Tune process

5 posts in Product Futures Discussion Last posting was on 2002-04-24 16:01:01.0Z
Orkan Genc Posted on 2002-04-22 11:28:12.0Z
From: "Orkan Genc" <ogenc@takasbank.com.tr>
Subject: Interfere to Deadlock Tune process
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:28:12 +0300
Lines: 29
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Message-ID: <BATPCFf6BHA.71@forums.sybase.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.15.15.65
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:520
Article PK: 93691

Hi All;

I'm almost sure that many people had wanted a preferrence or priority tag to
be placed on some procedures but I don't know if it has been stated here
before. It is about selecting the deadlock's victim. We all know the
considerations made to select the victim when a deadlock occurs. However,
life is not perfect and this is not always what we want. In some cases we
don't really care who deserves to be the victim. Personally I get pretty
upset when I see a critical procedure get involved with a *less* critical
one and selected as the victim. These *less* important ones are generally
are report generating procs and I really don't mind if they are terminated,
they can be generated at any time. I hear some friends saying "change the
limitations to those procs". Well, OK you may be right but I can not always
justify this when operation department's manager asks for a prompt report.
To make the long story short it would be perfect (almost!!) if we could
classify prosesses in terms of importance. I hope you find this request
resonable..

Regards,
A.ORKAN GENC

SYBASE ASE DATABASE ADMINISTRATOR 12.0.0.3

ISTANBUL STOCK EXC. TAKASBANK INC.

e-mail: <mailto:ogenc@takasbank.com.tr


Rob Verschoor Posted on 2002-04-22 15:12:11.0Z
Reply-To: "Rob Verschoor" <rob@DO.NOT.SPAM.sypron.nl>
From: "Rob Verschoor" <rob@DO.NOT.SPAM.sypron.nl>
References: <BATPCFf6BHA.71@forums.sybase.com>
Subject: Re: Interfere to Deadlock Tune process
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:12:11 +0200
Lines: 58
Organization: Sypron B.V.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Message-ID: <TxUKCFh6BHA.196@forums.sybase.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
NNTP-Posting-Host: a221046.upc-a.chello.nl 62.163.221.46
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:518
Article PK: 93687


"Orkan Genc" <ogenc@takasbank.com.tr> wrote in message
news:BATPCFf6BHA.71@forums.sybase.com...
> Hi All;
>
> I'm almost sure that many people had wanted a preferrence or
priority tag to
> be placed on some procedures but I don't know if it has been stated
here
> before. It is about selecting the deadlock's victim. We all know the
> considerations made to select the victim when a deadlock occurs.
However,
> life is not perfect and this is not always what we want. In some
cases we
> don't really care who deserves to be the victim. Personally I get
pretty
> upset when I see a critical procedure get involved with a *less*
critical
> one and selected as the victim. These *less* important ones are
generally
> are report generating procs and I really don't mind if they are
terminated,
> they can be generated at any time. I hear some friends saying
"change the
> limitations to those procs". Well, OK you may be right but I can not
always
> justify this when operation department's manager asks for a prompt
report.
> To make the long story short it would be perfect (almost!!) if we
could
> classify prosesses in terms of importance. I hope you find this
request
> resonable..
>
> Regards,
> A.ORKAN GENC
>

I agree -- it would be useful to have a say in who gets victimised in
case of a deadlock. I believe MS SQL Server has this possibility
already for a few years.

HTH,

Rob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Verschoor

Certified Sybase Professional DBA for ASE 12.0/11.5/11.0

Author of "The Complete Sybase ASE Quick Reference Guide"
Online orders accepted at http://www.sypron.nl/qr

email mailto:rob@*do*not*spam*sypron.nl
WWW http://www.sypron.nl
snail Sypron B.V., P.O.Box 10695, 2501HR Den Haag, The Netherlands
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Bret Halford Posted on 2002-04-22 14:51:23.0Z
Message-ID: <3CC4236B.51BA8F72@sybase.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:51:23 -0600
From: Bret Halford <bret@sybase.com>
Organization: Sybase, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Interfere to Deadlock Tune process
References: <BATPCFf6BHA.71@forums.sybase.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Lines: 36
NNTP-Posting-Host: 157.133.80.180
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:519
Article PK: 93695

Hi Orkan,

There is an open feature request for user-defined deadlock victim selection, the
CR
number is 230301.

-bret

Orkan Genc wrote:

> Hi All;
>
> I'm almost sure that many people had wanted a preferrence or priority tag to
> be placed on some procedures but I don't know if it has been stated here
> before. It is about selecting the deadlock's victim. We all know the
> considerations made to select the victim when a deadlock occurs. However,
> life is not perfect and this is not always what we want. In some cases we
> don't really care who deserves to be the victim. Personally I get pretty
> upset when I see a critical procedure get involved with a *less* critical
> one and selected as the victim. These *less* important ones are generally
> are report generating procs and I really don't mind if they are terminated,
> they can be generated at any time. I hear some friends saying "change the
> limitations to those procs". Well, OK you may be right but I can not always
> justify this when operation department's manager asks for a prompt report.
> To make the long story short it would be perfect (almost!!) if we could
> classify prosesses in terms of importance. I hope you find this request
> resonable..
>
> Regards,
> A.ORKAN GENC
>
> SYBASE ASE DATABASE ADMINISTRATOR 12.0.0.3
>
> ISTANBUL STOCK EXC. TAKASBANK INC.
>
> e-mail: <mailto:ogenc@takasbank.com.tr


Orkan Genc Posted on 2002-04-24 08:47:16.0Z
From: "Orkan Genc" <ogenc@takasbank.com.tr>
References: <BATPCFf6BHA.71@forums.sybase.com> <3CC4236B.51BA8F72@sybase.com>
Subject: Re: Interfere to Deadlock Tune process
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 11:47:16 +0300
Lines: 64
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Message-ID: <InjLU026BHA.298@forums.sybase.com>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.15.15.65
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:514
Article PK: 93690

Hi Bret;

It is really good to hear that. (Thanks for the support Rob ;) ). Is it too
much if I ask when this CR was made and how soon do you think it will be
implemented? My estimate is that it will not be introduced with an EBF but
with a new version of ASE, right?

Thanks,
Regards

Orkan

"Bret Halford" <bret@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:3CC4236B.51BA8F72@sybase.com...
> Hi Orkan,
>
> There is an open feature request for user-defined deadlock victim
selection, the
> CR
> number is 230301.
>
> -bret
>
>
> Orkan Genc wrote:
>
> > Hi All;
> >
> > I'm almost sure that many people had wanted a preferrence or priority
tag to
> > be placed on some procedures but I don't know if it has been stated here
> > before. It is about selecting the deadlock's victim. We all know the
> > considerations made to select the victim when a deadlock occurs.
However,
> > life is not perfect and this is not always what we want. In some cases
we
> > don't really care who deserves to be the victim. Personally I get pretty
> > upset when I see a critical procedure get involved with a *less*
critical
> > one and selected as the victim. These *less* important ones are
generally
> > are report generating procs and I really don't mind if they are
terminated,
> > they can be generated at any time. I hear some friends saying "change
the
> > limitations to those procs". Well, OK you may be right but I can not
always
> > justify this when operation department's manager asks for a prompt
report.
> > To make the long story short it would be perfect (almost!!) if we could
> > classify prosesses in terms of importance. I hope you find this request
> > resonable..
> >
> > Regards,
> > A.ORKAN GENC
> >
> > SYBASE ASE DATABASE ADMINISTRATOR 12.0.0.3
> >
> > ISTANBUL STOCK EXC. TAKASBANK INC.
> >
> > e-mail: <mailto:ogenc@takasbank.com.tr
>


Bret Halford Posted on 2002-04-24 16:01:01.0Z
Message-ID: <3CC6D6BD.51F4A226@sybase.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 10:01:01 -0600
From: Bret Halford <bret@sybase.com>
Organization: Sybase, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Orkan Genc <ogenc@takasbank.com.tr>
Subject: Re: Interfere to Deadlock Tune process
References: <BATPCFf6BHA.71@forums.sybase.com> <3CC4236B.51BA8F72@sybase.com> <InjLU026BHA.298@forums.sybase.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Lines: 82
NNTP-Posting-Host: 157.133.80.180
Path: forums-1-dub!forums-master.sybase.com!forums.sybase.com
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:513
Article PK: 93679

Hi Orkan,

I made the change request at the beginning of this year, I think off of a
discussion
on one of these forums. There is, however, no way for me to say when or if the
request
will ever be implemented; there are feature requests opened in the 1980s that
have
not been addressed yet (and some that probably never will be). In general, new
features
are not introduced in EBFs, although there are exceptions (sp_sendmsg() for
instance), they
are usually introduced in full new versions, though it looks like we are
starting to introduce
some in IR releases (12.5.0.1 IR, for instance, introduces several new features
not in 12.5 GA).

At the moment, your best options for getting a particular feature enhancment
implemented are
to vote for it at the ISUG website (http://www.isug.com) and/or to contact the
ASE product manager
at Sybase with your request. In addition, you can open a case with Sybase tech
support and
ask them to associate your case with the feature request CR (in theory, the more
customers
associated with a CR, the more importance is given to it) - after which your
case will be closed
as tech support has no way to give you status on feature requests.

-bret

Orkan Genc wrote:

> Hi Bret;
>
> It is really good to hear that. (Thanks for the support Rob ;) ). Is it too
> much if I ask when this CR was made and how soon do you think it will be
> implemented? My estimate is that it will not be introduced with an EBF but
> with a new version of ASE, right?
>
> Thanks,
> Regards
>
> Orkan
>
> "Bret Halford" <bret@sybase.com> wrote in message
> news:3CC4236B.51BA8F72@sybase.com...
> > Hi Orkan,
> >
> > There is an open feature request for user-defined deadlock victim
> selection, the
> > CR
> > number is 230301.
> >
> > -bret
> >
> >
> > Orkan Genc wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All;
> > >
> > > I'm almost sure that many people had wanted a preferrence or priority
> tag to
> > > be placed on some procedures but I don't know if it has been stated here
> > > before. It is about selecting the deadlock's victim. We all know the
> > > considerations made to select the victim when a deadlock occurs.
> However,
> > > life is not perfect and this is not always what we want. In some cases
> we
> > > don't really care who deserves to be the victim. Personally I get pretty
> > > upset when I see a critical procedure get involved with a *less*
> critical
> > > one and selected as the victim. These *less* important ones are
> generally
> > > are report generating procs and I really don't mind if they are
> terminated,
> > > they can be generated at any time. I hear some friends saying "change
> the
> > > limitations to those procs". Well, OK you may be right but I can not
> always
> > > justify this when operation department's manager asks for a prompt
> report.
> > > To make the long story short it would be perfect (almost!!) if we could
> > > classify prosesses in terms of importance. I hope you find this request
> > > resonable..
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > A.ORKAN GENC
> > >
> > > SYBASE ASE DATABASE ADMINISTRATOR 12.0.0.3
> > >
> > > ISTANBUL STOCK EXC. TAKASBANK INC.
> > >
> > > e-mail: <mailto:ogenc@takasbank.com.tr
> >