| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Harkness <daveh(at)MEconomy(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: LOCK TABLE oddness in PLpgSQL function called via JDBC |
| Date: | 2001-10-02 21:22:52 |
| Message-ID: | 19396.1002057772@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
Dave Harkness <daveh(at)MEconomy(dot)com> writes:
> The problem I'm seeing is that two database transactions,
> initiated via JDBC, are able to obtain simultaneous exclusive table locks
> on the same table.
Sounds to me like JDBC is feeding all your commands through a single
database connection, which means that what you think are independent
transactions are really not. Better take a closer look at what you're
doing.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Harkness | 2001-10-02 21:38:30 | Re: LOCK TABLE oddness in PLpgSQL function called via |
| Previous Message | Dave Harkness | 2001-10-02 21:09:27 | Re: LOCK TABLE oddness in PLpgSQL function called via JDBC |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Harkness | 2001-10-02 21:38:30 | Re: LOCK TABLE oddness in PLpgSQL function called via |
| Previous Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2001-10-02 21:18:27 | Re: [HACKERS] CVS changes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Siebert | 2001-10-02 21:37:20 | Re: TIMESTAMP |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-10-02 21:19:21 | Re: driver fails to handle strings in query statements properly |