Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-943-c2735985858@github.com>
From: "matthias-mueller (@matthias-mueller)" <noreply+matthias-mueller@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 09:55:15 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] PR #943: fix: synchronize modification of shared calendar (#921)
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-943@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-943@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: matthias-mueller
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 2735985858
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Issue: 943
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/943#issuecomment-2735985858
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

> In general you should not consider JDBC drivers to be thread safe.

Jepp, I know. However, I have a use case where this property 

> [...] multiple statements created from a single connection can be processing simultaneously in concurrent threads.

would be extremely useful. - And I would like to get a reliable conclusion / statement whether this behaviour is also guaranteed by pgjdbc.