Friday, February 24, 2012

Blkby Spid -2

I have an issue with and testing enviornment between weblogics application
and SQL server where we are trying to the transaction threshold above 5000
transaction per hour. We have a test that was ran yesterday for 12 hours
trying 8000 transactions per hour threw weblogics against sql server. When
we came in this morning the connections to sql server showed that all
connection from this server we were doing test on were blocked by the same
spid, when getting down the the specific spid, that spid was blocked by spid
-2. I had a simular issue about 1 year ago but cannot seem to remember what
causes the block spid -2 issue. My system is Sql 2000 running sp4. If you
need to post the specific sp_who2 dump I can but figured this information
would be sufficiant.
ThanksHi
In SQL Server 2000 and later, all orphaned distributed transactions are
assigned the session ID value of '-2'. Orphaned distributed transactions are
distributed transactions that are not associated with any session ID.
Stop and restart MSDTC.
Regards
--
Mike
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"JosephPruiett" <JosephPruiett@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0083D010-4C3D-4F16-886A-8DED076B43B1@.microsoft.com...
>I have an issue with and testing enviornment between weblogics application
> and SQL server where we are trying to the transaction threshold above 5000
> transaction per hour. We have a test that was ran yesterday for 12 hours
> trying 8000 transactions per hour threw weblogics against sql server.
> When
> we came in this morning the connections to sql server showed that all
> connection from this server we were doing test on were blocked by the same
> spid, when getting down the the specific spid, that spid was blocked by
> spid
> -2. I had a simular issue about 1 year ago but cannot seem to remember
> what
> causes the block spid -2 issue. My system is Sql 2000 running sp4. If
> you
> need to post the specific sp_who2 dump I can but figured this information
> would be sufficiant.
> Thanks
>
>

No comments:

Post a Comment