| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Raphael Bauduin <raphael(dot)bauduin(at)be(dot)easynet(dot)net>, David Busby <busby(at)pnts(dot)com>, <pgsql-php(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Number of connections |
| Date: | 2003-05-23 15:58:32 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0305230958030.27073-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-php |
On Fri, 23 May 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Maybe a stupid question, but I wondered if when using persisten
> > connection, I could be sure there would be no problem. From the doc,
> > currval "Returns the value most recently obtained by nextval for this
> > sequence in the current server process."
> >
> > Can you confirm me several script using the same persistent connection
> > in parallel are in separate server processes?
>
> PHP will execute 'begin; rollback;' to your connection before passing it to
> another PHP process, guaranteeing that unclosed transactions won't leak.
Didn't it used to not do that? I remember posts about people having
issues with transaction bleedover back in the day.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-05-23 16:04:09 | Re: faster output from php and postgres |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-05-23 15:45:06 | Re: Number of connections |