I have an odd one here.  I was unable to find it with a search of the mailing 
lists.  I've spent a few hours trying to create a simple test case, but so far 
these simple cases aren't showing the problem.  I want to make sure this isn't 
a know problem before investing more time trying to come up with a test case 
suffiently complex to expose the problem.
 
The problem is this:  a single thread is submitting database updates through a 
middle tier which has a pool of connections.  There are no guarantees of which 
connection will be used for any request.  Each request is commited as its own 
database transaction before the middle tier responds to the requester, which 
then immediately submits the next request.  Nothing else it hitting the 
database.  We are getting serialization errors.
 
If we add a 1 ms delay on the client side between requests to the middle tier, 
the frequency of these errors drops by about two orders of magnitude.  With a 
100 ms delay, we haven't seen any.
 
The pattern of activity which causes the problem involves a single database 
transaction with inserts and updates to many tables, including one with a 
potentially large blob, followed by an update to a numeric column in a row 
which tracks progress.  The serialization errors are happening on this final 
update.  My simple test cases use a single thread on two JDBC connection 
emulating just this final update, and the problem does not show up.
 
We have the same behavior on 8.0.3 and the develpment snapshot from yesterday.  
(I haven't gotten a test run from today's beta release yet -- I need to 
coordinate the test with someone else who's not here right now.  I'll follow up 
if the beta release changes this behavior.)
 
The server is SuSE 9.3 with dual xeons and xfs on a SAN.  The client and middle 
tier for these tests have been on Windows XP.  The requests are going through 
JDBC.
 
Does this behavior sound familiar to anyone?
 
-Kevin
 



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to