From: elein@varlena.com
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org, Junaili Lie <junaili@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Cc: elein <elein@varlena.com>
Subject: Re: <IDLE> in transaction
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:01:40 -0700
Message-ID: <20050820010140.GC5365@varlena.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050819230602.GM15622@surnet.cl>
References: <8d04ce990508181616c93fbbc@mail.gmail.com>
<20050819000218.GS5365@varlena.com>
<20050819185519.GY5365@varlena.com>
<20050819230602.GM15622@surnet.cl>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 07:06:02PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 11:55:19AM -0700, elein wrote:
> > I'm cross posting to INTERFACES. Please follow up
> > on INTERFACES and not on general. Cross posting is evil.
>
> Well, I'm not on -interfaces, so I'll reply to both :-) I don't worry
> too much about crossposting, because a) it's commonplace in PostgreSQL
> lists, and b) majordomo can deliver a single copy of the message if you
> configure it to do so.
>
>
> > > Some of these I-i-t connections come and go after a while.
> > > Some stick around for DAYS.
> > >
> > > If ANYONE has any brilliant ideas as to the source and
> > > dare I say correction to this problem, many people, especially
> > > myself would be very very happy.
>
> While this is a purely client-side problem, which is the client issuing
> a BEGIN right after a COMMIT, we talked about coding around it
> server-side, back in the time when I was doing nested transactions.
> It didn't get done though. I think if you push hard enough, somebody
> (myself?) may do it for 8.2.
To replicate the situation is psql:
BEGIN;
select something;
In another window I see that I have not only shared access locks
but an exclusive access lock. I do not understand why the exclusive
lock is there. Am I seeing ghosts?
Also, for some relief we found a piece of code that forgot its
commit. That helped a lot but I'm not convinced it was the only place
this occurred.
--elein
>
> Of course, this is no solution if the client started a transaction, did
> some work, and then sat on the connection with the transaction open for
> days. But this is not a common case and is certainly much more broken,
> if only because other RDBMS behave more reasonably in the COMMIT-BEGIN
> scenario.
>
> --
> Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]alvh.no-ip.org>)
> "La persona que no quería pecar / estaba obligada a sentarse
> en duras y empinadas sillas / desprovistas, por cierto
> de blandos atenuantes" (Patricio Vogel)
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: elein@varlena.com, junaili@gmail.com, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: <IDLE> in transaction
In-Reply-To: <20050820010140.GC5365@varlena.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox