From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Statement.cancel() race condition |
Date: | 2005-12-02 03:13:53 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.61.0512012211440.29741@leary.csoft.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Kris Jurka wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>
>>
>> The problem is that even after the exception comes out of this code, is
>> caught, and the transaction is rolled back -- we are still often able to
>> start another statement which is running by the time the server gets
>> around to interrupting the related back end process. Obviously, having
>> the cancel of one statement actually interrupt the processing of a
>> subsequent statement violates the popular principle of "least surprising
>> result".
>>
>
> I think taking the ReceiveEOF portion of this patch:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2003-09/msg00175.php
>
> would fix this in the single thread case. The multi-threaded case is
> obviously more complicated. I don't recall why the original patch wasn't
> committed.
>
I've applied this fix for single threaded applications to 8.0, 8.1 and
HEAD. The multi-threaded stuff is more complicated than I'd like to get
into at the moment.
Kris Jurka
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | NosyMan | 2005-12-02 09:42:38 | jdbc and ARRAYs |
Previous Message | Kris Jurka | 2005-12-01 23:39:15 | Re: Statement.cancel() race condition |