Search Results

Search found 3089 results on 124 pages for 'lock up'.

Page 1/124 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• "dm-tool lock" doesn't lock my session

  - by cape1232

  When I use dm-tool to lock the screen for userA, I can log in as userB and then use dm-tool to switch back to userA's session without having to enter a password. Is that the expected behavior? If not, how should I switch from A to B without leaving userA exposed? userA$ dm-tool lock -- Shows Greeter. Login as userB. userB$ dm-tool switch-to-user userA -- Expected this to go to greeter, but it goes right back to userA's session. Do I have something mis-configured, or what?

  Read the article

• How to create a shared lock blocking an intent exclusive lock

  - by FremenFreedom

  As I understand it, a SELECT statement will place a shared lock on the rows that it will return. While that SELECT is running, if an UPDATE statement comes along and needs to grab an intent exclusive lock then that UPDATE statement will need to wait until the SELECT statement releases its shared locks. I am trying to test this SELECT shared lock thing by doing a BEGIN TRAN and then running a SELECT, not COMMITing, and then running an UPDATE in another session on the exact same row. The UPDATE worked fine -- no lock, no wait. So this must not be a valid way to simulate a shared lock blocking an intent exclusive lock? Can you give me a scenario where I can create a lock with a SELECT that would force an UPDATE to wait? I'm working with SQL Server 2000 and 2005 across a linked server: the table is on the 2005 instance, the select is happening on 2000, and the update is executed from 2005. All in SSMS 2005.

  Read the article

• How pattern lock disbles screen lock in android

  - by CED

  Hi, In android 2.1, if we enable pattern lock, then the screen lock (slide to unlock) is not displayed and if pattern lock is disabled then screen lock is enabled again. Can someone point me out the java file in framework and the function where this happens. I mean when the screen is about to get locked, how does android decide that whether it will display pattern lock or screen lock and if pattern lock, how it prevents the screen lock from getting displayed.

  Read the article

• Why lock-free data structures just aren't lock-free enough

  - by Alex.Davies

  Today's post will explore why the current ways to communicate between threads don't scale, and show you a possible way to build scalable parallel programming on top of shared memory. The problem with shared memory Soon, we will have dozens, hundreds and then millions of cores in our computers. It's inevitable, because individual cores just can't get much faster. At some point, that's going to mean that we have to rethink our architecture entirely, as millions of cores can't all access a shared memory space efficiently. But millions of cores are still a long way off, and in the meantime we'll see machines with dozens of cores, struggling with shared memory. Alex's tip: The best way for an application to make use of that increasing parallel power is to use a concurrency model like actors, that deals with synchronisation issues for you. Then, the maintainer of the actors framework can find the most efficient way to coordinate access to shared memory to allow your actors to pass messages to each other efficiently. At the moment, NAct uses the .NET thread pool and a few locks to marshal messages. It works well on dual and quad core machines, but it won't scale to more cores. Every time we use a lock, our core performs an atomic memory operation (eg. CAS) on a cell of memory representing the lock, so it's sure that no other core can possibly have that lock. This is very fast when the lock isn't contended, but we need to notify all the other cores, in case they held the cell of memory in a cache. As the number of cores increases, the total cost of a lock increases linearly. A lot of work has been done on "lock-free" data structures, which avoid locks by using atomic memory operations directly. These give fairly dramatic performance improvements, particularly on systems with a few (2 to 4) cores. The .NET 4 concurrent collections in System.Collections.Concurrent are mostly lock-free. However, lock-free data structures still don't scale indefinitely, because any use of an atomic memory operation still involves every core in the system. A sync-free data structure Some concurrent data structures are possible to write in a completely synchronization-free way, without using any atomic memory operations. One useful example is a single producer, single consumer (SPSC) queue. It's easy to write a sync-free fixed size SPSC queue using a circular buffer*. Slightly trickier is a queue that grows as needed. You can use a linked list to represent the queue, but if you leave the nodes to be garbage collected once you're done with them, the GC will need to involve all the cores in collecting the finished nodes. Instead, I've implemented a proof of concept inspired by this intel article which reuses the nodes by putting them in a second queue to send back to the producer. * In all these cases, you need to use memory barriers correctly, but these are local to a core, so don't have the same scalability problems as atomic memory operations. Performance tests I tried benchmarking my SPSC queue against the .NET ConcurrentQueue, and against a standard Queue protected by locks. In some ways, this isn't a fair comparison, because both of these support multiple producers and multiple consumers, but I'll come to that later. I started on my dual-core laptop, running a simple test that had one thread producing 64 bit integers, and another consuming them, to measure the pure overhead of the queue. So, nothing very interesting here. Both concurrent collections perform better than the lock-based one as expected, but there's not a lot to choose between the ConcurrentQueue and my SPSC queue. I was a little disappointed, but then, the .NET Framework team spent a lot longer optimising it than I did. So I dug out a more powerful machine that Red Gate's DBA tools team had been using for testing. It is a 6 core Intel i7 machine with hyperthreading, adding up to 12 logical cores. Now the results get more interesting. As I increased the number of producer-consumer pairs to 6 (to saturate all 12 logical cores), the locking approach was slow, and got even slower, as you'd expect. What I didn't expect to be so clear was the drop-off in performance of the lock-free ConcurrentQueue. I could see the machine only using about 20% of available CPU cycles when it should have been saturated. My interpretation is that as all the cores used atomic memory operations to safely access the queue, they ended up spending most of the time notifying each other about cache lines that need invalidating. The sync-free approach scaled perfectly, despite still working via shared memory, which after all, should still be a bottleneck. I can't quite believe that the results are so clear, so if you can think of any other effects that might cause them, please comment! Obviously, this benchmark isn't realistic because we're only measuring the overhead of the queue. Any real workload, even on a machine with 12 cores, would dwarf the overhead, and there'd be no point worrying about this effect. But would that be true on a machine with 100 cores? Still to be solved. The trouble is, you can't build many concurrent algorithms using only an SPSC queue to communicate. In particular, I can't see a way to build something as general purpose as actors on top of just SPSC queues. Fundamentally, an actor needs to be able to receive messages from multiple other actors, which seems to need an MPSC queue. I've been thinking about ways to build a sync-free MPSC queue out of multiple SPSC queues and some kind of sign-up mechanism. Hopefully I'll have something to tell you about soon, but leave a comment if you have any ideas.

  Read the article

• Purpose of /run/lock/ (empty except for ./whoopsie/)

  - by Aeyoun

  My /run/lock/ directory is empty except for ./whoopsie/. I have understood /run/lock/ as a replacement for /var/lock/ but was surprised to find it entirely empty. Is whoopsie meant as a deterrent from using this directory? I did find other lock files under /run/, though. Most notably in /run/user/<me>/. I would have expect per-users lock files in /run/lock/user/ and not in a separate directory. Hoping for some clarification!

  Read the article

• Know More About Oracle Row Lock

  - by Liu Maclean(???)

  ??????Oracle??????????row lock,??ORACLE????????????????????,row lock???????????????????????????????,??Server Process?pin????block buffer????????? ????????,?process A ??update???????? Z?????????, ???????rollback???commit;??Process B??????DML??, ???????rowid???? Z???, ???????????process A????????ITL???,????????cleanout??,????????row???????????commit, ???????Process B????”enq: TX – row lock contention”??????? ????Process B????????????? ?????????Process A???????row,??Process B???????”enq: TX – row lock contention”???? ????????  ????????: SESSION A: SQL> select * from v$version; BANNER ---------------------------------------------------------------- Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.5.0 - 64bi PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.5.0 - Production CORE    10.2.0.5.0      Production TNS for Linux: Version 10.2.0.5.0 - Production NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.5.0 - Production SQL> select * from global_name; GLOBAL_NAME -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- www.oracledatabase12g.com SQL> create table maclean_lock(t1 int); Table created. SQL> insert into maclean_lock values (1); 1 row created. SQL> commit; Commit complete. SQL> select dbms_rowid.rowid_block_number(rowid),dbms_rowid.rowid_relative_fno(rowid) from maclean_lock; DBMS_ROWID.ROWID_BLOCK_NUMBER(ROWID) DBMS_ROWID.ROWID_RELATIVE_FNO(ROWID) ------------------------------------ ------------------------------------                                67642                                    1 SQL>  select distinct sid from v$mystat;        SID ----------        142 SQL> select pid,spid from v$process where addr = ( select paddr from v$session where sid=(select distinct sid from v$mystat));        PID SPID ---------- ------------         17 15636 ??SESSION A ????savepoint ,?update ?????????         SQL>  savepoint NONLOCK; Savepoint created. SQL> select * From v$Lock where sid=142; no rows selected SQL> set linesize 140 pagesize 1400 SQL>  update maclean_lock set t1=t1+2; 1 row updated. SQL> select * From v$Lock where sid=142; ADDR             KADDR                   SID TY        ID1        ID2      LMODE    REQUEST      CTIME      BLOCK ---------------- ---------------- ---------- -- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- 0000000091FC69F0 0000000091FC6A18        142 TM      55829          0          3          0          6          0 00000000914B4008 00000000914B4040        142 TX     393232        609          6          0          6          0         SQL> select dump(3,16) from dual; DUMP(3,16) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Typ=2 Len=2: c1,4 ALTER SYSTEM DUMP DATAFILE 1 BLOCK 67642;  Object id on Block? Y  seg/obj: 0xda16  csc: 0x00.234718  itc: 2  flg: O  typ: 1 - DATA      fsl: 0  fnx: 0x0 ver: 0x01  Itl           Xid                  Uba         Flag  Lck        Scn/Fsc 0x01   0x000a.00f.000001e0  0x00800075.02a6.29  C---    0  scn 0x0000.00234711 0x02   0x0007.018.000001fe  0x0080065c.017a.02  ----    1  fsc 0x0000.00000000 data_block_dump,data header at 0x81d185c =============== tsiz: 0x1fa0 hsiz: 0x14 pbl: 0x081d185c bdba: 0x0041083a      76543210 flag=-------- ntab=1 nrow=1 frre=-1 fsbo=0x14 fseo=0x1f9a avsp=0x1f83 tosp=0x1f83 0xe:pti[0]      nrow=1  offs=0 0x12:pri[0]     offs=0x1f9a block_row_dump: tab 0, row 0, @0x1f9a tl: 6 fb: --H-FL-- lb: 0x2  cc: 1 col  0: [ 2]  c1 04 end_of_block_dump ?? BLOCK DUMP ???? ??????XID=0x0007.018.000001fe ?transaction?? lb:0x1 ??SESSION B ,?????UPDATE?? ???enq: TX - row lock contention ?? SQL> select distinct sid from v$mystat;        SID ----------        140 SQL> select pid,spid from v$process where addr = ( select paddr from v$session where sid=(select distinct sid from v$mystat));        PID SPID ---------- ------------         24 15652 SQL> alter system set "_trace_events"='10000-10999:255:24'; System altered.         SQL> update maclean_lock set t1=t1+2; select * From v$Lock where sid=142 or sid=140 order by sid; SESSION C: SQL> select * From v$Lock where sid=142 or sid=140 order by sid; ADDR             KADDR                   SID TY        ID1        ID2      LMODE    REQUEST      CTIME      BLOCK ---------------- ---------------- ---------- -- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- 0000000091FC6B10 0000000091FC6B38        140 TM      55829          0          3          0         84          0 00000000924F4A58 00000000924F4A78        140 TX     458776        510          0          6         84          0 00000000914B51E8 00000000914B5220        142 TX     458776        510          6          0        312          1 0000000091FC69F0 0000000091FC6A18        142 TM      55829          0          3          0        312          0 ???? SESSION B SID=140 ?SESSION A ?TX ENQUEUE ?X mode?REQUEST SQL> oradebug dump systemstate 266; Statement processed. SESSION B waiter's enqueue lock       SO: 0x924f4a58, type: 5, owner: 0x92bb8dc8, flag: INIT/-/-/0x00       (enqueue) TX-00070018-000001FE    DID: 0001-0018-00000022       lv: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  res_flag: 0x6       req: X, lock_flag: 0x0, lock: 0x924f4a78, res: 0x925617c0       own: 0x92b76be0, sess: 0x92b76be0, proc: 0x92a737a0, prv: 0x925617e0 TX-00070018-000001FE=> TX 458776 510 SESSION A owner's enqueue lock       SO: 0x914b51e8, type: 40, owner: 0x92b796d0, flag: INIT/-/-/0x00       (trans) flg = 0x1e03, flg2 = 0xc0000, prx = 0x0, ros = 2147483647 bsn = 0xed5 bndsn = 0xee7 spn = 0xef7       efd = 3       file:xct.c lineno:1179       DID: 0001-0011-000000C2       parent xid: 0x0000.000.00000000       env: (scn: 0x0000.00234718  xid: 0x0007.018.000001fe  uba: 0x0080065c.017a.02  statement num=0  parent xid: xid: 0x0000.000.00000000  scn: 0x00 00.00234718 0sch: scn: 0x0000.00000000)       cev: (spc = 7818  arsp = 914e8310  ubk tsn: 1 rdba: 0x0080065c  useg tsn: 1 rdba: 0x00800069             hwm uba: 0x0080065c.017a.02  col uba: 0x00000000.0000.00             num bl: 1 bk list: 0x91435070)             cr opc: 0x0 spc: 7818 uba: 0x0080065c.017a.02       (enqueue) TX-00070018-000001FE    DID: 0001-0011-000000C2       lv: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00  res_flag: 0x6       mode: X, lock_flag: 0x0, lock: 0x914b5220, res: 0x925617c0       own: 0x92b796d0, sess: 0x92b796d0, proc: 0x92a6ffd8, prv: 0x925617d0        xga: 0x8b7c6d40, heap: UGA       Trans IMU st: 2 Pool index 65535, Redo pool 0x914b58d0, Undo pool 0x914b59b8       Redo pool range [0x86de640 0x86de640 0x86e0e40]       Undo pool range [0x86dbe40 0x86dbe40 0x86de640]         ----------------------------------------         SO: 0x91435070, type: 39, owner: 0x914b51e8, flag: -/-/-/0x00         (List of Blocks) next index = 1         index   itli   buffer hint   rdba       savepoint         -----------------------------------------------------------             0      2   0x647f1fc8    0x41083a     0xee7 ?SESSION A? ROLLBACK ?savepoint: SQL> rollback to NONLOCK; Rollback complete. ????savepoint ??update??????? ??UPDATE???????? ROLLBACK: SQL> select * From v$Lock where sid=142 or sid=140; ADDR             KADDR                   SID TY        ID1        ID2      LMODE    REQUEST      CTIME      BLOCK ---------------- ---------------- ---------- -- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- 00000000924F4A58 00000000924F4A78        140 TX     458776        510          0          6        822          0 0000000091FC6B10 0000000091FC6B38        140 TM      55829          0          3          0        822          0 00000000914B51E8 00000000914B5220        142 TX     458776        510          6          0       1050          1 ???? SESSION A 142 ???SAVEPOINT ???????TM LOCK ????? ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT?????SESSION???TX LOCK!!!! ??????SESSION 142???TX ID1=458776 ID2=510, ????ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT?????????ABORT TRANSACTION ?? SESSION B  SID=140??  SESSION A ?? , ?????????SESSION B? update???HANG?? ?????????CACHE?????:  Object id on Block? Y  seg/obj: 0xda16  csc: 0x00.2347b7  itc: 2  flg: O  typ: 1 - DATA      fsl: 0  fnx: 0x0 ver: 0x01  Itl           Xid                  Uba         Flag  Lck        Scn/Fsc 0x01   0x000a.00f.000001e0  0x00800075.02a6.29  C---    0  scn 0x0000.00234711 0x02   0x0000.000.00000000  0x00000000.0000.00  ----    0  fsc 0x0000.00000000 data_block_dump,data header at 0x745d85c =============== tsiz: 0x1fa0 hsiz: 0x14 pbl: 0x0745d85c bdba: 0x0041083a      76543210 flag=-------- ntab=1 nrow=1 frre=-1 fsbo=0x14 fseo=0x1f9a avsp=0x1f83 tosp=0x1f83 0xe:pti[0]      nrow=1  offs=0 0x12:pri[0]     offs=0x1f9a block_row_dump: tab 0, row 0, @0x1f9a tl: 6 fb: --H-FL-- lb: 0x0  cc: 1 col  0: [ 2]  c1 02 end_of_block_dump ???? ITL=0x02? ?????????,col  0: [ 2]  c1 02 ????????? ?????????SESSION D ,??????row lock?? ?UPDATE???????? SESSION D: SQL> update maclean_lock set t1=t1+2; 1 row updated. SQL> rollback; Rollback complete. ??SESSION B ??????????? ?????ORACLE????????, ??????????? TX lock?? row lock , ????????2??? row lock?????????, ?TX lock????????ENQUEUE LOCK???? ?????????PROCESS K?DML???????????????????????,??????????TX LOCK, ????PROCESS Z?????????????????????????ROW LOCK????????, ???????OLTP?????????????????????? ??ROW LOCK?Release ??????TX?ENQUEUE LOCK,?????????Process J ????????????, Process K??????????? ,Process K?????????,???row piece?lb??0x0 ,?????ITL, Process Z???ITL???????Process J????XID,?????Process J?????TX lock, PROCESS K ???TX resource?Enqueue Waiter Linked List?????X mode(exclusive)?enqueue lock? ???Process J??TX lock?,Process J?????TX resource?Enqueue Waiter Linked List ???Process K??????,??POST?????Process K? TX lock??????, ???????row lock???????,????????? ?????????? ?????: SESSION A ???PID =17 ?????????????????? SESSION B ???PID =24 ??????? "_trace_events"='10000-10999:255:24';  KST trace ??????? Server Process??? SESSION A PID=17  ?? acqure?SX mode???TM Lock ,?? ????Transaction?????UNDO SEGMENT 7,???XID 7.24.510, ?acquire ?X mode? TX-00070018-000001fe ? ?????? 00070018-000001fe ???? 7- 24 - 510? XID ? 781F4B8A:007A569C    17   142 10704  83 ksqgtl: acquire TM-0000da15-00000000 mode=SX flags=GLOBAL|XACT why="contention" 781F4B92:007A569D    17   142 10704  19 ksqgtl: SUCCESS 781F4BB3:007A569E    17   142 10812   2 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000234717 781F4BBA:007A569F    17   142 10812   3 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 781F4BC0:007A56A0    17   142 10812   4 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 781F4BD3:007A56A1    17   142 10812   5 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 781F4BFE:007A56A2    17   142 10811   1 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000234711 0x0000000000000002 781F4C06:007A56A3    17   142 10811   2 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000234718 0x00007FA074EDA560 781F4C26:007A56A4    17   142 10813   1 ktubnd: Bind usn 7 nax 1 nbx 0 lng 0 par 0 781F4C43:007A56A5    17   142 10813   2 ktubnd: Txn Bound xid: 7.24.510 781F4C4A:007A56A6    17   142 10704  83 ksqgtl: acquire TX-00070018-000001fe mode=X flags=GLOBAL|XACT why="contention" 781F4C51:007A56A7    17   142 10704  19 ksqgtl: SUCCESS ?????????? ???????? 781F4CBF:007A56A8    17   142 10005   1 KSL WAIT BEG [SQL*Net message to client] 1650815232/0x62657100 1/0x1 0/0x0 781F4CCC:007A56A9    17   142 10005   2 KSL WAIT END [SQL*Net message to client] 1650815232/0x62657100 1/0x1 0/0x0 time=13 781F4CDE:007A56AA    17   142 10005   1 KSL WAIT BEG [SQL*Net message from client] 1650815232/0x62657100 1/0x1 0/0x0 786BD85D:007A57E0    17   142 10005   2 KSL WAIT END [SQL*Net message from client] 1650815232/0x62657100 1/0x1 0/0x0 time=5016447 786BD966:007A57E1    17   142 10005   1 KSL WAIT BEG [SQL*Net message to client] 1650815232/0x62657100 1/0x1 0/0x0 786BD96E:007A57E2    17   142 10005   2 KSL WAIT END [SQL*Net message to client] 1650815232/0x62657100 1/0x1 0/0x0 time=8 SESSION B ???PID =24  ,??????? SX mode? TM lock,??row lock? acquire X mode?TX-00070018-000001fe ksqgtl: acquire TM-0000da15-00000000 mode=SX flags=GLOBAL|XACT why="contention" ksqgtl: SUCCESS 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x00000000002354F8 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000000000 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x00000000002354F8 0x0000000000000001 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x00000000002354F8 0x0000000008A63780 0x0000000000000001 0x0000000000800861 0x0000000000000241 0x0000000000000001 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000001 0x0000000000000001 0x000000000041083A 0x0000000000000000 0x00000000002354F9 0x0000000000000002 ksqgtl: acquire TX-00070018-000001fe mode=X flags=GLOBAL|LONG why="row lock contention" C4048EBD:007F52B6    24   140 10005   2 KSL WAIT END [enq: TX - row lock contention] 1415053318/0x54580006 458776/0x70018 510/0x1fe time=2929879 C4048ED4:007F52B7    24   140 10005   1 KSL WAIT BEG [enq: TX - row lock contention] 1415053318/0x54580006 458776/0x70018 510/0x1fe C43146CA:007F535E    24   140 10005   2 KSL WAIT END [enq: TX - row lock contention] 1415053318/0x54580006 458776/0x70018 510/0x1fe time=2930676 ????????? ,PID=24 ??????ksqcmi???????? deadlock C43146D9:007F535F    24   140 10704 134 ksqcmi: performing local deadlock detection on TX-00070018-000001fe C43146F8:007F5360    24   140 10704 150 ksqcmi: deadlock not detected on TX-00070018-000001fe ?? ??? PID 17 ??ROLLBACK ???? ,????????: PID 17 ROLLBACK; D7A495BB:007F9D3E    17   142 10005   4 KSL POST SENT postee=24 loc='ksqrcl' id1=0 id2=0 name=   type=0 D7A495D8:007F9D3F    17   142 10444  12 ABORT TRANSACTION - xid: 0x0007.018.000001fe ??  PID 17 ??? TX resource?Enqueue Waiter linked List ???PID 24???,????KSL POST SENT ?? PID 24, ???ksqrcl???ENQUEUE LOCK ?PID 24??????KSL POST (KSL POST RCVD poster=17), ?ksqgtl???? TX-00070018-000001fe ?? ksqrcl??, ??PID 24???????? TX lock?USN ,??????? USN 3 XID 3.11.582 ,???acquire TX-0003000b-00000246 D7A49616:007F9D41    24   140 10005   3 KSL POST RCVD poster=17 loc='ksqrcl' id1=0 id2=0 name=   type=0 fac#=0 facpost=1 D7A4961C:007F9D42    24   140 10704  19 ksqgtl: SUCCESS D7A4967D:007F9D43    24   140 10704 117 ksqrcl: release TX-00070018-000001fe mode=X D7A496A5:007F9D44    24   140 10813   1 ktubnd: Bind usn 3 nax 1 nbx 0 lng 0 par 0 D7A496C2:007F9D45    24   140 10813   2 ktubnd: Txn Bound xid: 3.11.582 D7A496C7:007F9D46    24   140 10704  83 ksqgtl: acquire TX-0003000b-00000246 mode=X flags=GLOBAL|XACT why="contention" D7A496E4:007F9D47    24   140 10704  19 ksqgtl: SUCCESS ROW LOCK?Release ??????TX?ENQUEUE LOCK,?????????Process J ????????????, Process K??????????? ,Process K?????????,???row piece?lb??0×0 ,?????ITL,Process Z???ITL???????Process J????XID,?????Process J?????TX lock,PROCESS K ???TX resource?Enqueue Waiter Linked List?????X mode(exclusive)?enqueue lock? ???Process J??TX lock?,Process J?????TX resource?Enqueue Waiter Linked List ???Process K??????,??POST?????Process K? TX lock??????,???????row lock???????,?????????

  Read the article

• Unable to remove the lock by normal means

  - by Loki

  I've been installing ubuntu restricted extras via the software center. Everything was going well at first, but then the installation process froze on 'applying changes' stage. I've had this in the past already, and usually just hitting the 'cancel' button helped, but not this time. Obviously, the install process has placed a lock, and I couldn't issue any apt-get commands. then i've tried doing what was suggested here Fixing Could not get lock /var/lib/dpkg/lock : sudo fuser -cuk /var/lib/dpkg/lock; sudo rm -f /var/lib/dpkg/lock but it seemed to me that it has only killed my X server. Okay, i've just pressed the power button on my PC, and restarted, hoping that the lock was finally off and i could reinstall the stuff. No dice. when I open the software center, I still have one operation in process, a weird one: " Searching | Cancelling ". The 'cancel' button is either inactive, or it just does nothing. So I've become desperate and decided to write here. How do I fix the problem? Can't install anything on a fresh ubuntu 12.04 :) Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• Java ReentrantReadWriteLocks - how to safely acquire write lock?

  - by Andrzej Doyle

  I am using in my code at the moment a ReentrantReadWriteLock to synchronize access over a tree-like structure. This structure is large, and read by many threads at once with occasional modifications to small parts of it - so it seems to fit the read-write idiom well. I understand that with this particular class, one cannot elevate a read lock to a write lock, so as per the Javadocs one must release the read lock before obtaining the write lock. I've used this pattern successfully in non-reentrant contexts before. What I'm finding however is that I cannot reliably acquire the write lock without blocking forever. Since the read lock is reentrant and I am actually using it as such, the simple code lock.getReadLock().unlock(); lock.getWriteLock().lock() can block if I have acquired the readlock reentrantly. Each call to unlock just reduces the hold count, and the lock is only actually released when the hold count hits zero. EDIT to clarify this, as I don't think I explained it too well initially - I am aware that there is no built-in lock escalation in this class, and that I have to simply release the read lock and obtain the write lock. My problem is/was that regardless of what other threads are doing, calling getReadLock().unlock() may not actually release this thread's hold on the lock if it acquired it reentrantly, in which case the call to getWriteLock().lock() will block forever as this thread still has a hold on the read lock and thus blocks itself. For example, this code snippet will never reach the println statement, even when run singlethreaded with no other threads accessing the lock: final ReadWriteLock lock = new ReentrantReadWriteLock(); lock.getReadLock().lock(); // In real code we would go call other methods that end up calling back and // thus locking again lock.getReadLock().lock(); // Now we do some stuff and realise we need to write so try to escalate the // lock as per the Javadocs and the above description lock.getReadLock().unlock(); // Does not actually release the lock lock.getWriteLock().lock(); // Blocks as some thread (this one!) holds read lock System.out.println("Will never get here"); So I ask, is there a nice idiom to handle this situation? Specifically, when a thread that holds a read lock (possibly reentrantly) discovers that it needs to do some writing, and thus wants to "suspend" its own read lock in order to pick up the write lock (blocking as required on other threads to release their holds on the read lock), and then "pick up" its hold on the read lock in the same state afterwards? Since this ReadWriteLock implementation was specifically designed to be reentrant, surely there is some sensible way to elevate a read lock to a write lock when the locks may be acquired reentrantly? This is the critical part that means the naive approach does not work.

  Read the article

• Lock Question - 'U' lock vs. 'X' lock

  - by Randy Minder

  I have a couple questions concerning Update (U) locks and Exclusive (X) locks. 1) Am I correct that an 'X' lock is put on a resource when the resource is about to get updated? 2) I'm a little fuzzy on U locks. Am I correct that a U lock is applied when a resource is read and SQL Server thinks it might need to update the resource later? If this is correct, would a 'U' lock only get applied when a read is being done within the context of a transaction? I guess I'm trying to understand under what circumstances SQL Server thinks it might need to update later a row it just read now. Thanks - Randy

  Read the article

• Installation Error, "Unable to lock the administration directory"

  - by kern

  Whenever I try to install any software through Terminal or Software on my Ubuntu 11.04, I'm getting this response: In Terminal: E: Could not get lock /var/lib/dpkg/lock - open (11: Resource temporarily unavailable) E: Unable to lock the administration directory (/var/lib/dpkg/), is another process using it? In Software Center An unhandlable error occured There seems to be a programming error in aptdaemon, the software that allows you to install/remove software and to perform other package management related tasks. What should I do?

  Read the article

• Lock screen does not display all users (ubuntu 14.10)

  - by Ali Alwan

  When I lock my screen using ctrl+alt+L, I am not able to see other users listed within the lock screen so I can switch instead. The lock screen shows only my name as an option for login, however I would like to switch to other user accounts. In Ubuntu 12.04 it used to show all system available users in lock screen and I was able to switch easily. Last night I upgraded to Ubuntu 14.04 and this option is gone. How do I set back this option?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Lock Screen Conflict with Google Chrome

  - by S.K.

  I don't know if this is a "feature" or not, but when I lock my screen in Ubuntu (GNOME 3), if Google Chrome needs to show a JavaScript alert (like if I set a reminder for an event in Google Calendar), Chrome will show up on top of the lock screen. If you'd like to simulate it, try running this JSFiddle, just click on the green box and lock your screen before the alert shows up - http://jsfiddle.net/skoshy/ZYSYr/ Anyone know how to fix/avoid this?

  Read the article

• Screen will not lock automatically 12.10

  - by swalker2001

  Since upgrading to 12.10 I cannot get my screen to lock automatically. I am using GDM at home and LightDM at work and neither will lock automatically. However, when I issue CTRL + ALT + L on either system, the screen will lock as it should. It is set to turn the display off after 5 minutes and lock screen when screen turns off. Require Password is set also. Display turns off after 5 minutes but no locking occurs. I am using Unity with Compiz on both systems. Not sure what other things might be involved.

  Read the article

• What is the best practice for using lock within inherited classes

  - by JDMX

  I want to know if one class is inheriting from another, is it better to have the classes share a lock object that is defined at the base class or to have a lock object defined at each inheritance level. A very simple example of a lock object on each level of the class public class Foo { private object thisLock = new object(); private int ivalue; public int Value { get { lock( thisLock ) { return ivalue; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { ivalue= value; } } } } public class Foo2: Foo { private object thisLock2 = new object(); public int DoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock2 ) { return base.Value * 2; } } set { lock( thisLock2 ) { base.Value = value / 2; } } } } public class Foo6: Foo2 { private object thisLock6 = new object(); public int TripleDoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock6 ) { return base.DoubleValue * 3; } } set { lock( thisLock6 ) { base.DoubleValue = value / 3; } } } } A very simple example of a shared lock object public class Foo { protected object thisLock = new object(); private int ivalue; public int Value { get { lock( thisLock ) { return ivalue; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { ivalue= value; } } } } public class Foo2: Foo { public int DoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock ) { return base.Value * 2; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { base.Value = value / 2; } } } } public class Foo6: Foo2 { public int TripleDoubleValue { get { lock( thisLock ) { return base.DoubleValue * 3; } } set { lock( thisLock ) { base.DoubleValue = value / 3; } } } } Which example is the preferred way to manage locking within an inherited class?

  Read the article

• GNOME lock screen (screensaver) is missing music controls

  - by oleg

  I have a custom Ubuntu 12.10 configuration (started out as a minimal installation of Ubuntu 12.04 with a number of other packages such as Gnome Shell selectively installed via apt-get and then upgraded to 12.10). (Almost) everything works just fine. However, the lock screen (Gnome screensaver) does not expose a UI to control music playback. Whenever I have Rhythmbox running in the background I cannot pause music playback without unlocking the screen. Obviously some package(s) or configuration bits are not present but I am not able to figure out what needs to be added or done in order to enable playback control in the lock screen. Any idea what I might be missing? Ideally I would not like to install Ubuntu desktop only to get music controls in the Gnome lock screen.

  Read the article

• Possible to use screen lock as timeout? [duplicate]

  - by Alex

  This question already has an answer here: Any app that tells me to take regular breaks from working? 3 answers What I'd like to do is lock the screen and have it wait a set amount of time (eg 20 mins) before it lets me log back in - so I make myself to have a break from the computer. Is it possible to do this? Thanks EDIT: Thanks for the suggestions - but I don't actually want something to remind me to take scheduled breaks. More something I can click when I realise I'm getting distracted and it'll immediately lock the screen for a fixed amount of time. Or even just lock screen if I can find a way to stop it letting me log in for 20 mins or so.

  Read the article

• No lock screen when the right click menu is open

  - by Shivram

  I just found that the lock screen on my laptop does not show up when the right click menu is open. I discovered this when I pressed the right click button accidentally while closing the lid and the laptop went to sleep, but the lock screen never showed up when I opened the lid again. I am also not able to lock the system manually(with ctrl+alt+L) when the right click menu is open. Is this by design or is it a bug? I would assume that the screen should be locked automatically when the computer goes to sleep, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Anyone have any suggestions? My specs are: Dell Vostro 1500, Ubuntu 12.10

  Read the article

• Disable Cinnamon 2 lock screen?

  - by minerz029

  When my computer is locked, I am presented with the default Ubuntu lockscreen. When I enter my password and unlock it, I am presented with the Cinnamon 2 lock screen and I have to enter my password again. How can I disable the Cinnamon 2 lock screen? Note: I've installed Cinnamon 2 with these commands: sudo add-apt-repository ppa:gwendal-lebihan-dev/cinnamon-stable sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get install cinnamon

  Read the article

• How do I enable Scroll Lock?

  - by Anton Ciprian Vasilache

  I need to enable scroll lock so I can toggle lights on my keyboard. This works on Arch.Funny thing it doesn't work on Ubuntu. http://linuxtechie.wordpress.com/2008/04/07/getting-scroll-lock-to-work-in-ubuntu/ $ xmodmap -e ‘add mod3 = Scroll_Lock’ xmodmap: unknown command on line commandline:1 xmodmap: unable to open file 'mod3' for reading xmodmap: unable to open file '=' for reading xmodmap: unable to open file 'Scroll_Lock’' for reading xmodmap: 4 errors encountered, aborting.

  Read the article

• Double lock screen Ubuntu 14.04

  - by Adam

  So I've got a brandynew System 76 laptop running Ubuntu 14.04, and if I close the lid, putting it to sleep, and reopen it, I am presented with the very nice new Unity lock screen. However, when I enter my password, and it succeeds, it then presents me with a second lock screen. Where I have to enter my password again, before finally being let into the desktop. Hash anyone else seen this sort of behavior?

  Read the article

• Display date/time in Ubuntu lock screen (cinnamon-like)

  - by 3l4ng

  I was using Ubuntu 13.04 till a few days ago. I had installed Nemo and I guess cinnamon got installed too (I was still using Unity nonetheless). One of the good things about that was the lock screen somehow changed to mimick cinnamon's (with the background as a darkened version of desktop background and date/time displayed), something like this: I have no idea how this happened, but it looked great. It does not seem to work on Ubuntu 13.10. Anyone has any ideas to get a similar lock screen? I just need to display the date/time on one side with the bg as a darkened version of my desktop wallpaper

  Read the article

• White lock screen in Gnome 3.4

  - by kedmond

  I'm using Gnome 3.4 on Ubuntu 12.04. I've noticed that my lock screen is white. If I move the mouse, click, or begin typing my password, my wallpaper appears in the background with the password prompt window, as you'd expect. But I don't think the default lock screen is supposed to just be a white screen, is it? How do I fix this? I can't seem to find anyone else with this problem and I don't know what I need to reinstall or change. Thanks!

  Read the article

• pthreads: reader/writer locks, upgrading read lock to write lock

  - by ScaryAardvark

  I'm using read/write locks on Linux and I've found that trying to upgrade a read locked object to a write lock deadlocks. i.e. // acquire the read lock in thread 1. pthread_rwlock_rdlock( &lock ); // make a decision to upgrade the lock in threads 1. pthread_rwlock_wrlock( &lock ); // this deadlocks as already hold read lock. I've read the man page and it's quite specific. The calling thread may deadlock if at the time the call is made it holds the read-write lock (whether a read or write lock). What is the best way to upgrade a read lock to a write lock in these circumstances.. I don't want to introduce a race on the variable I'm protecting. Presumably I can create another mutex to encompass the releasing of the read lock and the acquiring of the write lock but then I don't really see the use of read/write locks. I might as well simply use a normal mutex. Thx

  Read the article

• pthreads: reader/writer locks, upgrading read lock to write lock

  - by ScaryAardvark

  I'm using read/write locks on Linux and I've found that trying to upgrade a read locked object to a write lock deadlocks. i.e. // acquire the read lock in thread 1. pthread_rwlock_rdlock( &lock ); // make a decision to upgrade the lock in threads 1. pthread_rwlock_wrlock( &lock ); // this deadlocks as already hold read lock. I've read the man page and it's quite specific. The calling thread may deadlock if at the time the call is made it holds the read-write lock (whether a read or write lock). What is the best way to upgrade a read lock to a write lock in these circumstances.. I don't want to introduce a race on the variable I'm protecting. Presumably I can create another mutex to encompass the releasing of the read lock and the acquiring of the write lock but then I don't really see the use of read/write locks. I might as well simply use a normal mutex. Thx

  Read the article

• Calculating up-vector to avoid gimbal lock using euler angles

  - by jessejuicer

  I wish to orbit a camera around a sphere, yet the problem is that when the camera rotates so that it is at the north pole (and pointing down) or the south pole (and pointing up) of the sphere the camera doesn't handle itself very well. It spins rapidly until arriving 180 degrees in the opposite direction. I believe this is known as gimbal lock. I understand you can avoid this problem using quaternions. But I also read in another forum that it's possible to avoid this easily using euler angles as well. Which I would prefer to do. It was said that all you need to do is "calculate a proper up-vector every frame, and that avoids the problem entirely." Well, I tried aligning the up-vector with the vertical axis of the camera whenever the camera changed orientation, but this didn't seem to work. Meaning that the up-vector followed exactly the orientation of the camera's y-axis (or it's up vector), instead of using a constant up-vector aligned to the up-vector of the world (0, 1, 0). How exactly do I go about calculating a proper up-vector as my camera orientation changes to avoid the gimbal lock problem mentioned above?

  Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >