Re: Lost updates vs resumable connections/transactions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Greg Stark
Тема Re: Lost updates vs resumable connections/transactions
Дата
Msg-id 87is73qrde.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Lost updates vs resumable connections/transactions  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
Ответы Re: Lost updates vs resumable connections/transactions
Список pgsql-interfaces
Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:

> Even applications that have statefull enduser terminals (like SAP R/3 for
> example) never allow an open transaction over user interaction. 

I'm not sure using SAP as your paragon of design excellence is a wise choice
here. From what I understand SAP implemented its own locking system because
the database it was based on didn't offer any locking at all.

But your basic point is sound. For a web site I would definitely avoid using
anything like database locks and even avoid doing anything with application
locks if possible.

If you really really want to expose the database session state I think he's on
the right track using SQLRelay. This would let him handle reconnecting a user
with her session even if she's connecting to a different Apache process.

I suspect the database wouldn't really be able to suspend a database
connection using any less memory than just keeping the entire backend process
with its session around anyways.

-- 
greg



В списке pgsql-interfaces по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Dave Cramer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: postgresql-7.4.5
Следующее
От: Greg Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Lost updates vs resumable connections/transactions