Re: error - NOTICE: current transaction...MORE DETAIL...

tom

i do agree that since everyone isn't complaining, the problem is likely in
my code. the odd thing is that i wasn't seeing this behavior with the 7.0
stuff, only with the 7.1. (i was having the fastpath problem with 7.0, but
that's a different issue.)

i'm looking...

thanks
chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:10 PM
To: cmarkiew(at)commnav(dot)com
Cc: T(dot)R(dot)Missner(at)Level3(dot)com; pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org;
pgsql-jdbc-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [JDBC] error - NOTICE: current transaction...MORE DETAIL...

"chris markiewicz" <cmarkiew(at)commnav(dot)com> writes:
> i guess i don't understand the following: right, each connection is a
> different process. so if you use the second connection, why should it
fail
> too? it should have no relationship to the first connection, since it is
a
> different process.
> i was discussing this with a co-worker and he suggested that the first
> connection might be "spilling" into the second (when you grab the first
two
> connections, they may inhabit contiguous memory spaces...the first one
gets
> corrupted and corrupts the second...i admit that i am no unix expert so
> while i can picture such a thing, i have no idea whether or not it is
> possible.) anyway, you grab the third connection and it's not
> corrupt.

It seems to me that this must be happening on the client side somewhere.
On the server side, two different connections will lead to completely
separate processes which are very well insulated from each other.
OTOH, we've seen numerous reports of problems with connection-pooling
applications that got confused about which connection they were using
for what.

I don't have any real evidence to guess whether the fault is in your own
application code or in the JDBC driver. However, if it were in the
driver we'd probably be hearing more reports of trouble ... so I'd
suggest looking to your own code first ...

regards, tom lane