RE: [HACKERS] Re: SIGBUS in AllocSetAlloc & jdbc

That's true - but it wasn't until recently that the lo examples had
BEGIN and END in them.

It's on my list to get the JDBC examples to setAutoCommit(false).
Hopefully I'll get some time today to do this.

Peter

--
Peter T Mount, IT Section
petermount(at)it(dot)maidstone(dot)gov(dot)uk
Anything I write here are my own views, and cannot be taken as the
official words of Maidstone Borough Council

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 1999 6:12 PM
To: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp
Cc: postgres
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: SIGBUS in AllocSetAlloc & jdbc

Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> So far I couldn't find nothing special with the backend by now. Going
> back to the ImageViewer, I think I found possible problem with it. In
> my understanding, every lo call should be in single transaction block.

> But ImageViwer seems does not give any "begin" or "end" SQL commands.
> I made a small modifications(see below patches) to the ImageViewer and
> now it starts to work again with 6.5 backend!

Hmm. The documentation does say somewhere that LO object handles are
only good within a transaction ... so it's amazing this worked reliably
under 6.4.x.

Is there any way we could improve the backend's LO functions to defend
against this sort of misuse, rather than blindly accepting a stale
filehandle?

regards, tom lane