| From: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Naoya Anzai <anzai-naoya(at)mxu(dot)nes(dot)nec(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Akio Iwaasa <iwaasa(at)mxs(dot)nes(dot)nec(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: "cancelling statement due to user request error" occurs but the transaction has committed. |
| Date: | 2014-06-10 14:19:30 |
| Message-ID: | 1402409970.52828.YahooMailNeo@web122304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> If the connection is closed after the client sends a COMMIT and
> before it gets a response, then the client must indeed be smart
> enough to figure out whether or not the commit happened. But if
> the server sends a response, the client should be able to rely on
> that response being correct. In this case, an ERROR is getting
> sent but the transaction is getting committed; yuck. I'm not
> sure whether the fix is right, but this definitely seems like a
> bug.
+1
It is one thing to send a request and experience a crash or loss of
connection before a response is delivered. You have to consider
that the state of the transaction is indeterminate and needs to be
checked. But if the client receives a response saying that the
commit was successful, or that the transaction was rolled back,
that had better reflect reality; otherwise it is a clear bug.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-06-10 14:21:46 | Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-10 14:18:41 | Re: "cancelling statement due to user request error" occurs but the transaction has committed. |