Re: psql or pgbouncer bug? - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Re: psql or pgbouncer bug?
Date
Msg-id 95c0d90ca8a718c9e6737617ac06458b@biglumber.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: psql or pgbouncer bug?  (Jakub Ouhrabka <kuba@comgate.cz>)
List pgsql-bugs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


>> The auto-reconnect behavior is long-established and desirable.  What's
>> not desirable is continuing with any statements remaining on the same
>> line, I think.  We need to flush the input buffer on reconnect.

> So if I understand it correctly, if I need correct transaction behaviour
> in psql even in case of disconnection the only safe way is to use one
> statement per line.
>
> Is this correct?

Yes, that is correct. Pretty big gotcha.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201005240925
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkv6fncACgkQvJuQZxSWSsipbQCg3Cn6Hh4Uk9i2TwaKNgzB1Xef
apIAoLiNoJT4pjtA4xaZXL11XdgUYwph
=MF9l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "Daniele Varrazzo"
Date:
Subject: BUG #5469: regexp_matches() has poor behaviour and more poor documentation
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: psql or pgbouncer bug?