Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Several things. I think I wrote them along with my previous patch. The
> visibility rules and the pg_clog protocol are what comes to mind
> immediately. This is the difficult part.
Difficult part? I think those are easy --- they are narrow and alrea
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yeah. We agreed in principle awhile back to "fix" this on the backend
>> side by postponing the actual transaction start until the first command
>> after BEGIN.
> Actually, my patch is waiting for you to review it ;-) On the other
> hand, since I'm a
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Andrew Rawnsley wrote:
>
> I find that some clients (DBVisualizer for one) do exactly that -
> execute the COMMIT;BEGIN sequence, and leaves idle
> transactions on a consistent basis.
>
The 7.5 JDBC driver has been fixed to avoid this problem.
Kris Jurka
---
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 10:31:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > > Yeah. We agreed in principle awhile back to "fix" this on the backend
> > > > side by postponing the actual transaction start until the first command
> > > > after BEGIN. I looked at this just before 7.
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Yeah. We agreed in principle awhile back to "fix" this on the backend
> > > side by postponing the actual transaction start until the first command
> > > after BEGIN. I looked at this just before 7.4 feature freeze, but
> > > decided it wasn't quite trivial and I hadn'
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 09:54:08PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 03:57:59PM -0400, Andrew Rawnsley wrote:
> > >> I find that some clients (DBVisualizer for one) do exactly that -
> > >> execute the COMMI
Is this a TODO?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 03:57:59PM -0400, Andrew Rawnsley wrote:
> >> I find that some clients (DBVisualizer for one) do exactly that -
>
I find that some clients (DBVisualizer for one) do exactly that -
execute the COMMIT;BEGIN sequence, and leaves idle
transactions on a consistent basis.
On Apr 29, 2004, at 3:19 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 02:04:47PM -0400, Jon Pastore wrote:
pgsql thought there was a tran
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 02:04:47PM -0400, Jon Pastore wrote:
> pgsql thought there was a transaction in progress and was waiting
> for it to complete when in fact the commit had already taken place.
Come again? That doesn't sound possible. What ismore likely is that
somebody issues COMMIT;BEGIN;
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Chaney
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 10:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] postgresql idle
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:12:27PM -0400, Jon Pastore wrote:
> This perl script is designed to handle payment posting for an
> application we developed. I
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:12:27PM -0400, Jon Pastore wrote:
> This perl script is designed to handle payment posting for an application we
> developed. It runs fine on our development server which is running apache
> 1.3.27 on ES 2.1
>
> on the production server the script hangs and we see the
I have a strange
error.
when I do a ps aux
I get:
postgres
15018 0.0 0.6 9192 7396
? S
09:20 0:00 /usr/bin/perl
/www/nexum/cgi-bin/accounting/posting/automatic_postingpostgres 15019
0.0 0.3 25696 4176 ?
S 09:20 0:00 postgres: postgres nexum [local]:
idle
12 matches
Mail list logo
