> I don't think there is even an issue here After taking another view at what happens, I don't think either.
The exception is thrown when similar updates are made for one field, from several threads, when NO_WAIT specified. Only this flag causes it to throw. No matter if you specify flags consistent or concurrency. As I understood this is expected behavior. NO_WAIT flag is set for any IsolationLevel specified for a FbTransaction. The behavior of such updates is different from MSSQL provider (it waits) and discovering this was a kind frustrating and resulted in this thread. On 20 September 2015 at 16:30, Alexander Muylaert-Gelein <amuylaert_gel...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I don't think there is even an issue here. inside two different > transactions, you simply cannot update the same record. Who would win in > the end and what would be the end result. I'm pretty sure if you can solve > this, the firebird team would gladly implement this. > > a > > >> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:12:25 +0300 >> From: zabulu...@gmail.com >> To: firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net > >> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert >> >> I don't think that the issue in the .NET provider. It just forwards >> options to fbembed.dll for transactions it just TPB. And do it right. >> The problem is in the engine, I've retested it with C API and the >> behavior is similar to observed. My case is similar to the described >> here: http://www.firebirdfaq.org/faq109/. With just one difference: >> values field updated to is not depends on each other. I just update >> the same field from several threads. I've crutched this with skipping >> the exception because consistency is not a concern for this field. But >> IMO, there is an issue in the engine. >> >> On 20 September 2015 at 14:03, LtColRDSChauhan <rdsc1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Message: 3 >> >> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:56:20 +0200 >> >> From: Ji?? ?in?ura <j...@cincura.net> >> >> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert >> >> To: "For users and developers of the Firebird .NET providers" >> >> <firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net> >> >> Message-ID: >> >> <1442512580.927417.386542585.69829...@webmail.messagingengine.com> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 17:57, ???????? ?????? wrote: >> >> > Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same >> >> > record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue. >> >> >> >> The advice is simple. Don't update same record (not only in .NET; >> >> anywhere, anytool). :D >> >> >> > Transactions issues in .NET Provider need to be addressed. >> > Multithread/parallel programming and transactions enable correct >> > exploitation of multicore machines. I understand Firebird 3.0 takes >> > major >> > advances in this area. >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Firebird-net-provider mailing list >> > Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider >> > >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Firebird-net-provider mailing list >> Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Firebird-net-provider mailing list > Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Firebird-net-provider mailing list Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
