Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: setQueryTimeout problem !?!?!

From: robert engels <rengels(at)ix(dot)netcom(dot)com>
To: Guillaume Cottenceau <gc(at)mnc(dot)ch>
Cc: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: setQueryTimeout problem !?!?!
Date: 2008-03-18 14:07:51
Message-ID: 346482A0-AAB8-40B3-AC9F-841AB04A0A55@ix.netcom.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc
The database was not being changed, just the driver.

The is fairly standard practice in the java/database world. More  
recent drivers usually improve compatibility and performance.

Oracle, SQL (jtds), and others all work this way.


On Mar 18, 2008, at 8:44 AM, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:

> Dave Cramer <pg 'at' fastcrypt.com> writes:
>
>>> See previous discussion that prompted this change at http:// 
>>> archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2008-01/msg00088.php
>>
>> Unfortunately the argument assumes that our users are developing new
>> applications, not using the driver in an existing application. I  
>> think
>> this change should be reversed. A considerable number of people will
>> not be in a position to use an old driver with newer servers just to
>> avoid this.
>
> That's really a matter of practice - how much do you afford to
> break in order to fix previous problems or add features. Here,
> the story is to fix an unexpected behaviour of the JDBC driver
> (setQueryTimeout silently did nothing; it's *bad* to accept a
> query timeout value but then not implement any timeout; a
> correctly designed application will legally assume that the
> queries will timeout after the configured amount of time, which
> is not the case).
>
> Last year, we have upgraded from a 7.4 server to a 8.2 server. I
> can tell you that it's quite incorrect to assume that the
> application, running fine on 7.4, would magically run fine on 8.2
> too - actually, quite a lot of SQL queries were "broken", because
> of 8.2 not accepting UPDATE and DELETE FROM with implicit SELECT
> on different tables. We've had to validate our application again,
> and I think it's normal.
>
> That is to say, when the database is migrated from major
> releases, the application (or the DB layer) sometimes needs
> slight modifications, and it would be unreasonable deployment
> practices to not validate the application again anyway.
>
> -- 
> Guillaume Cottenceau, MNC Mobile News Channel SA, an Alcatel-Lucent  
> Company
> Av. de la Gare 10, 1003 Lausanne, Switzerland - direct +41 21 317  
> 50 36
>
> -- 
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc


In response to

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Oliver JowettDate: 2008-03-18 14:09:54
Subject: Re: setQueryTimeout problem !?!?!
Previous:From: Dave CramerDate: 2008-03-18 14:06:49
Subject: Re: Atomic operations?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group