John Rivers (first10@btinternet.com) writes:
Quote:
but by accepting deadlocks you risk one client being selected as the
deadlock victim repeatedly for a long period of time ... potentially
forever!
|
If you have that high deadlock frequency, you better do something about it.
It is possible that every deadlock that occurs in an application could be
address. But what would the cost be? And what would the risk be that you
introduce bugs or performance bottlenecks.
If you have a bunch of background processes that deadlocks with each
other, or at least willing to become the deadlock victim, then some 20-30
deadlocks per day is not a big issue. It becomes an issue, if users get
this message slapped in the face 20-30 times a day, or if you have deadlocks
every minute. Then again, if you have deadlocks every minute, the deadlocks
are likely to be a symptom of a general performance problem.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP,
esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx