| From: | "Sriram Dandapani" <sdandapani(at)counterpane(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Jim Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [JDBC] number of transactions doubling |
| Date: | 2006-09-29 21:44:15 |
| Message-ID: | 6992E470F12A444BB787B5C937B9D4DF060E5C96@ca-mail1.cis.local |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-jdbc |
Thanks for the clarification(I was puzzled on why the xid count was
really high)
That probably explains why my xid counter rapidly increases.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 2:39 PM
To: Sriram Dandapani
Cc: Jim Nasby; Heikki Linnakangas; pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org;
pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [JDBC] [ADMIN] number of transactions doubling
"Sriram Dandapani" <sdandapani(at)counterpane(dot)com> writes:
> Does the presence of an exception clause generate subtransactions
> regardless of whether exceptions occurred? If so, do subtransactions
> count towards the transaction id wraparound limit counter?
Yes, and yes.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-09-29 21:48:12 | Re: autovacuum ignore tables |
| Previous Message | Sriram Dandapani | 2006-09-29 21:42:54 | Re: autovacuum ignore tables |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mikko Tiihonen | 2006-09-29 22:01:13 | Query ResultSet parsing speedup patch (resend) |
| Previous Message | Mikael Carneholm | 2006-09-29 21:39:21 | Re: FAQ update about transaction interleaving |