Re: AW: postgres, idle in transaction

From: Tore Halset (halse..vv.ntnu.no)
Date: Wed Apr 25 2007 - 04:08:13 EDT

  • Next message: Jens Mayer: "user-defined transactions"

    Hello.

    I am reading this thread and just want to say that I am using cayenne
    2.0.2, postgresql-8.2-504.jdbc3.jar and postgresql-8.2.3. Cayenne
    uses jndi to get connections from a jboss-4.0.3 connection pooling. I
    do not see the "postgres, idle in transaction" problem.

      - Tore.

    On Apr 25, 2007, at 9:45 , Oilid Adsi wrote:

    > Hi Andrus,
    >
    > Thanks for the patch!
    >
    > I have deployed the patch yesterday and switched to cayenne data
    > source.
    >
    > But unfortunately there is no improvement as you supposed before.
    >
    > Is there no way to force this "stupid" COMMIT in a transaction?
    > Do you have another idea?
    >
    > Kind regards
    > Oilid
    >
    >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
    >> Von: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org]
    >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. April 2007 17:20
    >> An: use..ayenne.apache.org
    >> Betreff: Re: postgres, idle in transaction
    >>
    >> I just uploaded a patched 1.2 build with Cayenne connection pool
    >> rolling back transactions before returning them to the pool. Can you
    >> try it out (of course resetting DBCP data source back to Cayenne):
    >>
    >> http://people.apache.org/~aadamchik/patched/cayenne-nodeps-1.2.3-
    >> dev.jar
    >>
    >> I don't have too much hope this will fix it... but still worth a try.
    >>
    >> Andrus
    >>
    >>
    >> On Apr 24, 2007, at 5:28 PM, Oilid Adsi wrote:
    >>
    >>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
    >>>> Von: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:andru..bjectstyle.org]
    >>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. April 2007 16:21
    >>>> An: use..ayenne.apache.org
    >>>> Betreff: Re: AW: postgres, idle in transaction
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> On Apr 24, 2007, at 5:17 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Interesting... Looking at your log I see this:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 15:33:08.267 (2) FE=> Parse(stmt=S_1,query="BEGIN",oids={})
    >>>>> .....
    >>>>> 15:33:08.268 (2) FE=> Parse(stmt=null,query="SELECT ....
    >>>>> ....
    >>>>> 15:33:28.461 (2) FE=> Parse(stmt=S_2,query="COMMIT",oids={})
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> So transaction is clearly committed. But of course connection is
    >>>>> not closed. It is returned to the pool instead. Still looks like a
    >>>>> driver bug to me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Andrus
    >>>>
    >>>> Sorry, you said "sometimes". Just noticed that the first case
    >>>> indeed
    >>>> doesn't commit. Just thought of another potential source of leaks -
    >>>> Cayenne iterated queries. Are you using any of those?
    >>>
    >>> No, we are not using performIteratedQuery() with postgres.
    >>>
    >>> Is there another possibility to debug this problem or verify if
    >>> this is maybe a cayenne or jdbc-postgres bug?
    >>>
    >>> Oilid
    >>>
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Apr 25 2007 - 04:10:02 EDT