Re: idle in transaction

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Marc Mitchell" <marcm(at)eisolution(dot)com>
Cc: "'Warren Little'" <wlittle(at)securitylending(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: idle in transaction
Date: 2004-02-15 17:29:02
Message-ID: 9001.1076866142@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

"Marc Mitchell" <marcm(at)eisolution(dot)com> writes:
> So long as the idled transaction isn't holding any locks on any data
> resources, I don't know if this condition is a bad thing. It would be
> nice to be able to differentiate between a transaction that has been
> "declared" but has yet to really begin issuing any statements and take
> locks from transactions that are idle "mid-transaction".

You guys should probably take this to the pgsql-jdbc list, since that's
where the people who know the innards of the JDBC driver hang out.

I just saw a patch go by on that list that purports to
* Keeps track of the current transaction state.
* Prevents starting a new transaction until actually required.
so that may address your concern. I'm not enough of a JDBC hacker
to be sure though.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeremy Smith 2004-02-15 19:24:20 Re: SSH connection timing out
Previous Message Marc Mitchell 2004-02-15 17:10:50 Re: idle in transaction