Today's Consipiracy Theory is brought to you by this ancient SQL Server blog post: Today's Annoyingly-Unwieldy Term: "Intra-Query Parallel Thread Deadlocks"

I know SQL Server isn't the same as SQL Anywhere, but... they both have a lot of the same features.

So, here goes...

Is it possible for SQL Anywhere intra-query parallelism INT:Exchange connections to be involved in thread deadlocks that are silently "handled" by killing one or more INT:Exchange connections?

Is it possible for such thread deadlocks to go unnoticed because INT:Exchange connections don't have human users so there's nobody who will notice they've gone missing?

Is it possible for such thread deadlocks to be the cause of server outages sometimes associated with runaway intra-query parallelism usage?

Is this a good reason to add deadlock diagnosis via sa_report_deadlocks() to databases where max_query_tasks is something other than 1?

( this topic came up during research on a possible new Foxhound Alert and/or Flag to detect intra-query parallelism on servers that are really too busy for such shenanigans :)

asked 24 Jan, 16:07

Breck%20Carter's gravatar image

Breck Carter
31.4k5056941014
accept rate: 20%

Be the first one to answer this question!
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×4

question asked: 24 Jan, 16:07

question was seen: 127 times

last updated: 24 Jan, 16:07