Re: Hung JDBC connections

From: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
To: Mike Charnoky <noky(at)nextbus(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hung JDBC connections
Date: 2012-06-11 15:14:04
Message-ID: CADK3HHKHaSzzu__Ouk0XP-2Wnb_dTkLM89zbnumBEdFpja8RMw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Mike,

It was implemented in the 9_2 code

Dave Cramer

dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Mike Charnoky <noky(at)nextbus(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 06/09/2012 11:39 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>>
>>
>> Of course, It's not very friendly for the JDBC driver to wait indefinitely
>> without periodically checking and seeing if the connection was progressing,
>> so I'm glad to see that's changed in  9.1.
>>
> I took a look at the 9.1 JDBC driver source code, very enlightening. I see
> that Statement.setQueryTimeout() doesn't actually do anything! The method
> sets a member variable which is never accessed locally or by any subclasses
> or via getQueryTimeout(). There is even the following comment in
> AbstractJdbc2Statement:
>    /** Timeout (in seconds) for a query (not used) */
>    protected int timeout = 0;
>
> I see that ConnectionFactoryImpl does allow the underlying Socket's
> so_timeout and so_keepalive options to be set using the connection
> parameters string: http://jdbc.postgresql.org/documentation/91/connect.html
> (socketTimeout and tcpKeepAlive). Didn't realize these options existed, I
> will definitely be taking advantage of these.
>
> However, I see these options were available as far back as 8.4. What exactly
> are these driver changes in 9.1 that you mentioned???
>
>
> Mike
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message wbrana 2012-06-11 15:30:42 Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #6684: An I/O error occured while sending to the backend
Previous Message Mike Charnoky 2012-06-11 15:02:08 Re: Hung JDBC connections