Re: pg primary key bug?

<br /><br /> Ragnar Hafstað wrote:<br /><blockquote cite="mid1109073162.17839.124.camel@localhost.localdomain"
type="cite"><prewrap="">On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 10:33 +0100, pginfo wrote: </pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">  
 
We are using  jdbc (jdbc driver from pg)  + jboss (java based
application server) + connection pool (biult in jboss).
...
Will vacuum full generate this problem if we have locked table in this
time? (It is possible to have locked table in theory)   </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
I do not know if this is relevant, but I have seen jboss applications
keep sessions in 'Idle in transaction' state, apparently with some
locks granted. Would such cases not interfere with vacuum?

gnari
 </pre></blockquote> Only to add,<br /> also keeping sme transactions for long time not commited (possible).<br />
regards,<br/> ivan.<br /><blockquote cite="mid1109073162.17839.124.camel@localhost.localdomain" type="cite"><pre
wrap="">

 </pre></blockquote><br />