Re: locking problem in jdbc driver?

From: Richard Broersma <richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Sherif Kottapurath <sherifkm(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: locking problem in jdbc driver?
Date: 2009-12-30 16:46:50
Message-ID: 396486430912300846t519b787al4c6deba6d0d2cb25@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Sherif Kottapurath <sherifkm(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> All threads shown here are operating on
> the same table, and they are all parts of transactions involving multiple tables.
> deadlock detection is set for 1 sec and no dedlocks are reported by postgres.

From my experience, PostgreSQL doesn't report deadlocks. This is true
when purposely creating a dead-lock situation using two instances of
psql. However, unless you've set your transaction isolation level to
SERIALIZABLE ( the default isolation level is READ COMMITED), you will
not be getting deadlocks from PostgreSQL.

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/transaction-iso.html#XACT-SERIALIZABLE
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/transaction-iso.html#XACT-READ-COMMITTED

Also, IIRC the PostgreSQL JDBC driver only allows a single thread to
access a connection object at a time.

http://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/84/thread.html

Could this be causing your problem?

--
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Broersma 2009-12-30 22:15:59 Re: metadata as XML
Previous Message Sherif Kottapurath 2009-12-30 16:29:46 locking problem in jdbc driver?