Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194-c577123737@github.com>
From: "davecramer (@davecramer)" <noreply+davecramer@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:49:22 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] issue #194: PgJDBC can experience client/server deadlocks during batch execution
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-194@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: davecramer
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 577123737
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Issue: 194
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/194#issuecomment-577123737
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020, 12:59 AM Craig Ringer, <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> I increasingly think I need to find the time to make PgJDBC use separate
> threads for tx and rx so the method-caller's thread can retain control.
> PgJDBC can then wait on multiple events in possible deadlock scenarios,
> i.e. "when tx buffer is full, sleep until tx buffer writeable OR rx buffer
> readable".
>
> Shouldn't even be that hard.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were assigned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/194?email_source=notifications&email_token=AADDH5QB2EQ46ZDURFV46ULQ67OFDA5CNFSM4AVH6IZ2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEJSKO2A#issuecomment-577021800>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADDH5QLSB6FLM44UHGDY7LQ67OFDANCNFSM4AVH6IZQ>
> .
>

I have to agree. There are other good reasons to do this as well such as
the issues we run into in the replication protocol with socket timeouts

+1 from me

>