469,306 Members | 2,121 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,306 developers. It's quick & easy.

lock escalation question

we are using db2 udb v8.1 on windows, the configure parameter for
locks is locklist 1000, maxlocks 60, but somehow i still have the
error message

ADM5502W The escalation of "1" locks on table "SYSIBM
..SYSSCHEMAAUTH" to lock
intent "X" was successful.

so why even one lock on table still escalate to X lock? our
application doesn't use this table, so why there is lock on it, is it
used by DB2? our application use default isolation CS and auto commit
true
Nov 12 '05 #1
3 3815
<db********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**************************@posting.google.c om...
we are using db2 udb v8.1 on windows, the configure parameter for
locks is locklist 1000, maxlocks 60, but somehow i still have the
error message

ADM5502W The escalation of "1" locks on table "SYSIBM
.SYSSCHEMAAUTH" to lock
intent "X" was successful.

so why even one lock on table still escalate to X lock? our
application doesn't use this table, so why there is lock on it, is it
used by DB2? our application use default isolation CS and auto commit
true

That is not any error message. It is an informational message.

I am not 100% sure, but I do believe that this is an escalation from row
level lock to table level lock. This is a different kind of escalation, for
example from SIX (share with intent exclusive) to an X lock (exclusive).

The DB2 catalog table in question keeps tracks of authorizations, so someone
probably granted access to some object.
Nov 12 '05 #2
> That is not any error message. It is an informational message.

I am not 100% sure, but I do believe that this is an escalation from row
level lock to table level lock. This is a different kind of escalation, for example from SIX (share with intent exclusive) to an X lock (exclusive).

The DB2 catalog table in question keeps tracks of authorizations, so someone probably granted access to some object.

Sorry, the above should say:

I do NOT believe that this is an escalation from row level lock to table
level lock.
Nov 12 '05 #3
This is possible.
But anyway, please call IBM support.
(1). I found that Version8.1 seemed involve more lock requests than
Version7, even Version8 suppose to get away next key locks in most cases.
From the lock snapshot - I can't find the reason. But I got the same problem
since migrated to version8. The system tables have been escalated more often
than Version7.2.
(2). I did tell IBM that the system tables should not use the same way /same
db parameters as the user tables to be escalated. I wish there would be more
customers can bring this issue to IBM.

<db********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**************************@posting.google.c om...
we are using db2 udb v8.1 on windows, the configure parameter for
locks is locklist 1000, maxlocks 60, but somehow i still have the
error message

ADM5502W The escalation of "1" locks on table "SYSIBM
.SYSSCHEMAAUTH" to lock
intent "X" was successful.

so why even one lock on table still escalate to X lock? our
application doesn't use this table, so why there is lock on it, is it
used by DB2? our application use default isolation CS and auto commit
true

Nov 12 '05 #4

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

12 posts views Thread by xixi | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by Jane | last post: by
reply views Thread by Bruce Pullen | last post: by
7 posts views Thread by situ | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by kavallin | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by stefan.albert | last post: by
reply views Thread by cburnett | last post: by
1 post views Thread by clilush | last post: by
1 post views Thread by CARIGAR | last post: by
reply views Thread by zhoujie | last post: by
reply views Thread by harlem98 | last post: by
reply views Thread by harlem98 | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.