yep. looks like it was the library.
thanks,
Eugene
--- Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Dr NoName <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > ... My question is, would
> > > postgresql ps string show COMMIT at the end of
> > > INSERT/UPDATE even if explicit transactions are
> not
> > > used?
Tom Lane wrote:
> Dr NoName <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ... My question is, would
> > postgresql ps string show COMMIT at the end of
> > INSERT/UPDATE even if explicit transactions are not
> > used?
>
> No.
My guess is that his interface library is doing it.
--
Bruce Momjian
Dr NoName <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... My question is, would
> postgresql ps string show COMMIT at the end of
> INSERT/UPDATE even if explicit transactions are not
> used?
No.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
Hi all,
While investigating the causes of the deadlock I
described previously, we noticed that ps output would
often show some postgresql processes doing COMMIT. The
developer in charge of the application(*) assures me
that they are not using transactions (or at least not
in any of the code he che
