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

Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited.

From: Markus Schaber <schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com>
To: "John R Pierce" <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com>
Cc: "Csaba Nagy" <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited.
Date: 2004-09-21 07:59:22
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 08:52:29 -0700
"John R Pierce" <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:

> > Regarding cooperative locking and the fact that after a crash the lock
> > stays: I'm not sure how your application is designed, but in ours after
> > a crash we definitely want it to stay there, so we can manually check
> > the consistency of the data before releasing the lock for further
> > processing. I have bad experience with automatic recovery after crashes.
> in this particular case, the lock is to simply indicate there is an active 
> 'subscriber' to a messaging 'subject', if the app has exited any which ways, 
> by definition that 'subscriber' is no longer active, so yes, we want the 
> lock to go away. 

Have you ever thought at using LISTEN/NOTIFY for this purpose?


markus schaber | dipl. informatiker
logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 z├╝rich
phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53
mailto:schabios(at)logi-track(dot)com |

In response to

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Markus SchaberDate: 2004-09-21 08:09:48
Subject: Re: raising the default prepareTheshold
Previous:From: John R PierceDate: 2004-09-21 04:02:12
Subject: Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group