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

Re: psql or pgbouncer bug?

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: psql or pgbouncer bug?
Date: 2010-05-24 13:26:28
Message-ID: 95c0d90ca8a718c9e6737617ac06458b@biglumber.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


>> The auto-reconnect behavior is long-established and desirable.  What's
>> not desirable is continuing with any statements remaining on the same
>> line, I think.  We need to flush the input buffer on reconnect.

> So if I understand it correctly, if I need correct transaction behaviour 
> in psql even in case of disconnection the only safe way is to use one 
> statement per line.
>
> Is this correct?

Yes, that is correct. Pretty big gotcha.

- -- 
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201005240925
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkv6fncACgkQvJuQZxSWSsipbQCg3Cn6Hh4Uk9i2TwaKNgzB1Xef
apIAoLiNoJT4pjtA4xaZXL11XdgUYwph
=MF9l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-05-24 13:50:55
Subject: Re: psql or pgbouncer bug?
Previous:From: Daniele VarrazzoDate: 2010-05-24 13:16:51
Subject: BUG #5469: regexp_matches() has poor behaviour and more poor documentation

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