Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited.
От | Oliver Jowett |
---|---|
Тема | Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 414C13A6.8080407@opencloud.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited. (Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: "Idle in Transaction" revisited.
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Gaetano Mendola wrote: > John R Pierce wrote: > >> I'm curious what common practice is for threads that do nothing but >> SELECTS... do folks just enable auto_commit, thereby preventing pgJDBC >> from doing BEGIN; ? Do they lace their code with COMMIT() calls? > > > We were bitten by this problem too, and my solution was to suggest our > developer to do and explicit: "ABORT" after the connection, and do > explicit "BEGIN" "END" instead of rely on the jdbc interface. This is a pretty bad idea as it can confuse the driver's idea of the current transaction state. For example, cursor-based resultsets won't ever be used if you do your own transaction demarcation in this way. Better to use the standard JDBC autocommit API and a driver that has the premature-BEGIN problem fixed. -O
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: