Ora-24777 Error in Dedicated Mode
Thiru
We have 2 databases running on 2 IBM p570 Servers. Initally it was
configured to run in shared mode. We have 2 DB link to access each
other and the db level for both databases are as follows.
SQL> select * from v$version;
BANNER
----------------------------------------------------------------
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.7.0 - 64bit Production
PL/SQL Release 9.2.0.7.0 - Production
CORE 9.2.0.7.0 Production
TNS for IBM/AIX RISC System/6000: Version 9.2.0.7.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 9.2.0.7.0 - Production
During load testing we have faced Ora-00104 error(at 100 User load),
because the transaction is taking long time than expected(See the
Shared Server Conf below). So we dedicated to move to dedicated mode.
Now application is not working and we are getting Ora-24777 Error. A
worth point to mention is "A transaction in the database will also have
some operation in remote database over DB link". We are using Oracle
Application Server and Oracle Http Server. Data source in application
server has been configured as "Non-Emulated".
Shared Server Parameters
------------------------
max_shared_servers integer 20
shared_servers integer 5
dispatchers string
(protocol=TCP)(dispatchers=2)
max_dispatchers integer 5
mts_dispatchers string
(protocol=TCP)(dispatchers=2)
mts_max_dispatchers integer 5
Any help is appreciated.
Regards,
WantedToBeDBA.
Mark D Powell
$ oerr ora 24777
24777, 00000, "use of non-migratable database link not allowed"
// *Cause: The transaction, which needs to be migratable between
sessions,
// tried to access a remote database from a non-multi threaded
// server process.
// *Action: Perform the work in the local database or open a connection
to
// the remote database from the client. If multi threaded
server
// option is installed, connect to the Oracle instance through
the
// dispatcher.
So it appears you have not uninstalled/unconfigured the MTS/Shared
Server option. After all if you are not running dedicated server why
do you have dispatchers configured? Are you trying to run mixed mode:
dedicated and shared server?
We run distributed transactions using dedicated sessions so once you
eliminate the Shared Server settings and bounce the instance the
problem should go away.
Did you try increasing the value of MAX_SHARED_SERVERS to eliminate the
00104 errors prior to the attempt to run dedicated? When a shared
server issues a distributed transaction it is blocked waiting on a
reply and cannot service any other sessions. If you have a lot of
distribued calles then you will need a lot of shared servers or to run
dedicated.
HTH -- Mark D Powell --
Thiru
The configuration shown above is Shared. Due to Ora-00104 error, we
switch to Dedicated Mode(we have commented out the DISPATCHER and
SHARED Mode related parameters). But after that the application is not
working and we are getting Ora-24777 error. So, we have reverted back
to Shared mode and also we have increased the MAX_SHARED_SERVER to 100
now as the temporary fix.
1. I want to Know why Ora-24777 error is Dedicated mode even though
Oracle claims that Dedicated and Shared are just configuration and it
is internal to its own working.
2. When i try to google about the same, most the some are saying like
"Switch to Shared mode" or some claiming that as an oracle Bug.
"a shared server connection is by design "slower" than a dedicated
server (more stuff goes on, more complex) it is most likely only
getting in the way", an comment by Kyte, Vice president, Oracle Corp.
Regards,
WantedToBeDBA.
Thiru
originally in
http://www.dba-oracle.com/t_mts_multithreaded_servers_shared.htm
Regards,
WantedToBeDBA.
Mark D Powell
either the database was not bounced so all the connections would have
to be created as dedicated, all the shared server features were not
shut off, or perhaps the listener was configured to create a shared
server session then a call was made to the remote db.
We have run dedicated from 6.0.36 through 10g R1 and we have not seen
this problem so I suspect the problem has to do with your configuration
rather than a bug, but it could be a 9.2.0.7 specific issue. We only
have 9.2.0.6.
Good luck