Hello,
I come from a GTM background and once of the transactional features there are
the “Transaction Restarts”.
Transaction restart is when we have two concurrent processes reading/writing to
the same region/table of the database, the last process to commit will “see”
that the database is not
t;restart" the failed transactions...
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Bill Moran
wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 15:35:14 +0100
> Filipe Pina wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I come from a GTM background and once of the transactional features
> there are the ?Transact
h I wouldn't know where to start).
Thanks once again.
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Bill Moran
wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2015 10:41:25 +0100
> Filipe Pina wrote:
>
> > Hi Bill, thanks for the quick reply.
> >
> > I had read about SAVEPOINTs but I also read I cannot
l and insightful
and I'll definitely accept it as answer. If you have the time to elaborate
on a working example using dblink it would definitely by a nice bonus :)
Thank you once again
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Filipe Pina wrote:
>
> > I come from a GT
y "restart" the failed transactions...
-Original Message-
From: Bill Moran [mailto:wmo...@potentialtech.com]
Sent: 3 de abril de 2015 23:07
To: Filipe Pina
Cc: Postgresql General
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Serializable transaction restart/re-execute
On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 15:35:14 +0100
Fil
Exactly, my point was not to repeat point 4 but the whole step.
Upon serialization failure exception it would re-read data from database,
perform the same something with data and save it. And point 2 is the part
that fails in my "restart wrapper" function in the code I posted in
stackoverflow, it
Hello,
I'm building an app in Django and I want to have some functions
directly in postgres. I'd prefer to use pl/python for the functions as
it'd look better in Django migration files (python code within python
code, instead of using PLPGSQL).
But one of the functions I need to create needs
Thanks
On Sex, Mai 29, 2015 at 2:00 , Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 5/18/15 10:52 AM, Filipe Pina wrote:
But one of the functions I need to create needs to accept an array
of
records.
PL/Python doesn't support that. Some more code needs to be written to
support that. You did everything correctly. I don't know of a good
workaround.
ote:
>
> On 06/01/2015 07:42 AM, Filipe Pina wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply anyway, it's a pity though, it'd be useful..
>>
>> Another bump I've found along the pl/python road: insert ROWTYPE in table..
>> Maybe you have some hint on that? :)
>>
>&g
gn I don't really like to have specific SQL code
> into a generic python function.
>
> I agree it is cumbersome, and I also badly miss more powerful input for
> python function (after all, plpython can already return composite types,
> which is awesome)
>
>
> Cheers,
S(transaction.*)’)
pl = plpy.execute('INSERT INTO core_transaction VALUES(transaction2.*)')
return 1
END
$$
LANGUAGE plpythonu;
> On 02/06/2015, at 15:51, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>
> On 06/02/2015 03:10 AM, Filipe Pina wrote:
>> HI Adrian,
>>
>> I had a
[ original question posted in
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30789279/django-postgresql-retry-transaction-last-try-must-go-in
for easier read ]
I have a Django+PostgreSQL.
For data integrity pg is setup for serializable transactions, so I'm
retrying the transaction (in a generic class) as:
and over, the first one to reach
max_retries would activate that “global lock” making the other one wait and
then the second one would also be able to successfully commit...
> On 11/06/2015, at 20:27, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Filipe Pina writes:
>> It will try 5 times to execute e
I have these 2 tables:
CREATE TABLE "stuff" ("number" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, "title"
varchar(40) NOT NULL);
CREATE TABLE "stuff_ext" ("stuff_ptr_id" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
"extra" integer NOT NULL);
ALTER TABLE "stuff_ext" ADD CONSTRAINT
"stuff_ext_stuff_ptr_id_5a4ee8edae53404b"
e a problem)..
On Qua, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:45 , Bill Moran
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2015 13:33:12 +0001
Filipe Pina wrote:
I have these 2 tables:
CREATE TABLE "stuff" ("number" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
"title"
varchar(40) NOT NULL);
CREATE TABLE "
buntu
4.8.2-19ubuntu1) 4.8.2, 64-bit
Though I still get the failures on 9.4.4..
On Qua, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:52 , Kevin Grittner
wrote:
Filipe Pina wrote:
if drop the foreign key constraint on stuff_ext table there are
no failures at all…
It is my recollection that we were excluding the qu
.
On Qua, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:45 , Bill Moran
wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2015 13:33:12 +0001
Filipe Pina wrote:
I have these 2 tables:
CREATE TABLE "stuff" ("number" integer NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
"title"
varchar(40) NOT NULL);
CREATE TABLE "stuff_ext&quo
Kevin, assuming you will have some time to confirm that it has been fixed in
some version some time next week, I’ve compiled the test steps in
http://pastebin.com/4Uqc2kPv <http://pastebin.com/4Uqc2kPv>
Thanks once again
> On 17/06/2015, at 14:40, Filipe Pina wrote:
>
> Hi Kev
that performance would be
worse...
Thanks,
Filipe
On Sex, Jun 12, 2015 at 5:25 , Filipe Pina
wrote:
Exactly, that’s why there’s a limit on the retry number. On the
last try I wanted something like full lockdown to make sure the
transaction will not fail due to serialiazation failure (if no o
cuted?
EG:
UPDATE pg_database
SET datallowconn FALSE
WHERE datname = 'your_database' ;
START TRANSACTION;
COMMIT;
UPDATE pg_database
SET datallowconn TRUE
WHERE datname = 'your_database' ;
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Filipe Pina
wrote:
> So,
k TABLE
-> FUNCTION C
> TABLE is not locked anymore because function B frees it as soon
as it returns
Is there someway to have a function that locks some tables on the
"outter" transaction instead of its own subtransaction?
On Seg, Jul 6, 2015 at 3:08 , Filipe Pina
wrote:
wrote:
On 07/04/2015 10:49 AM, Filipe Pina wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion. I read that some people do use that
strategy
for maintenance sometimes but it's no feasible in this scenario.
I would have to disallow new connections AND kill all existing
connections (as there would be an existing
g locks, but implementing this "serialization failure"
handler is becoming a major headache...
Thanks guys!
On Ter, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:41 , Adrian Klaver
wrote:
On 07/06/2015 07:15 AM, Filipe Pina wrote:
Yes, I've tried to come up with guideline to enumerate tables used in
each p
On Ter, Jul 7, 2015 at 2:31 , Alban Hertroys wrote:
On 7 July 2015 at 12:55, Filipe Pina
wrote:
On Ter, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:41 , Adrian Klaver
wrote:
Still not sure what is you are trying to accomplish. Is it really
necessary
that every transaction be serialized? Or to put it another way
On Ter, Jul 7, 2015 at 2:51 , Adrian Klaver
wrote:
On 07/07/2015 06:44 AM, Filipe Pina wrote:
On Ter, Jul 7, 2015 at 2:31 , Alban Hertroys
wrote:
On 7 July 2015 at 12:55, Filipe Pina
wrote:
On Ter, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:41 , Adrian Klaver
wrote:
Still not sure what is you
25 matches
Mail list logo
