An Experiment with Deadlocks

There seems to be a myth out there that when deadlocks come a-knocking, then just throw this little directive (ROWLOCK) at it and all will be well. This is total fiction and we will explore that in this article.

Everything can be fixed with a query hint (*cough* directive), right? If a certain process is consistently causing deadlocks, a simple ROWLOCK hint can be added to prevent it, right?

Well, for whatever reason, there seems to be a myth out there that when deadlocks come a-knocking, then just throw this little directive at it and all will be well. Today, we get to test that and show what will continue to happen.

First, lets look at what the ROWLOCK actually means:

Specifies that row locks are taken when page or table locks are ordinarily taken.

This seems like a fabulous idea if the deadlocks are occurring against a table involving a massive update. Let’s take a look at a small update scenario involving just a handful of records. For the setup, we will use the same setup used in a previous article by Wayne.

Looking at the code, we can see there are only five rows in each of the tables. In addition, an update will be performed to both col1 and col2 in each table for one specific row. So we are keeping this to a singleton type of update, and we are able to force a deadlock by using this setup. Not only do we see that a deadlock will occur consistently, we would see the following in the sys.dm_tran_locks DMV as well as in the deadlock graphs.

In my environment, I used session 51 and 54 consistently for the deadlock repro. In each of the tests, each spid did obtain page locks as well as RID locks (row locks) that were waiting on each other in order to perform an Update. This is what we saw when I ran the setup without the ROWLOCK directive. What if I used the ROWLOCK directive (are you guessing already that there would be no change because the deadlock occurs on the lock held for the update that is waiting on the other update to complete?)? Let’s take a look at that too!

The only change to this setup is that the ROWLOCK directive has been added to the update statements. Examining the sys.dm_tran_locks DMV reveals the same locks being held as was seen without the directive. This shouldn’t be too big of a surprise since the updates are against a single row.

In addition to the same locks being held, we continue to experience the same deadlock problem. Using an Extended Events session to trap deadlock information (similar to the article previously discussed), we can pull out some pretty good info. Let’s examine some of the deadlock data trapped by an XE session.

The results from this query will show us the deadlock graph, the event data, as well as several other pieces of data already parsed from the session data for you. And looking at the session data, one can see that the sql_text from each of the queries will demonstrate both the ROWLOCK directive and the directive-free versions of the query. In this query you can also see that I did a little black magic to match up the two event types from the event session (lock_deadlock and xml_deadlock_report). Then I was able to join the two together to produce one row per deadlock event and to see the sql_text with the deadlock graph on one row. Otherwise, the sql_text does not produce with the dea