I have a source table which I'm splitting 3 ways based on a column value, but the target is the same OLE DB destination table. One conditional path is to a Multi-Cast two way split to same OLE DB gestination table. The default split is to a flat file for logging unknown record types. For a test I have data for only the 3 column values I want, but I'm having trouble with the process completing. If I pre-filter the data going into the source table by one or two values I can get the process to complete even if one split is to the multicast. If I include all three data types in the source table, I get different results depending on the order in which the conditions are specified - sometimes only two split paths are executed; other times all three are executed, but in some cases only one path of the multicast split is executed. In any case, when the three source data types are used in the test, the process never competes - the pathes are in a yellow condition and never complete.
Am I creating some kind of deadlock situation by having the source data directed to the same target table via 4 splits Any help you can provide is appreciated. Thanks.

Deadlock problem? 3 way conditional split of data from one table to another never completes
Jassim Rahma
Daniel TIZON
RayCan
If your situation allows it simply uncheck the destination table option "Table Lock" and it will work.
Philippe
Andy P.
Great, just make sure that the union all task is not better appropriate.
I use the do not lock table option only on tables that I kow for sure no other process is trying to update and or insert into.
And I do this at a time of night when nothing is accessing the table. Preferably against a staging table that will replace the production table using either sp_rename or things like that.
Philippe
Mark Benningfield
I'd agree with Phil and Philippe - a UNION ALL component is the better way to go. It will be more performant too because there is only one insertion operation.
-Jamie
snakeoooooo
I also want to clarify that if your different data flows were going to the same physical table, then yes, a union all transformation is what you want. It'll work, trust me! Come back here if you have issues with it.
Ganeshkumar S
Daniel Adeniji
Sylvia msdn forum
Wolfgang Kamir
zensunni
If you were previously using separate destination connectors for the same table, then yes, that would be the recommended technique.