Re: JDBC behaviour - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From Sridhar N Bamandlapally
Subject Re: JDBC behaviour
Date
Msg-id CAGuFTBX5=unxXDO04Qt=rSF0N+1u8KbGrEd773TWkNt8FqsQXg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: JDBC behaviour  (Sridhar N Bamandlapally <sridhar.bn1@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: JDBC behaviour  (Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladimir@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-jdbc
my point is functionality is first priority and then comes performance, 
no meaning of performance without functionality

autocommit off, should do just autocommit off only, nothing else



On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Sridhar N Bamandlapally <sridhar.bn1@gmail.com> wrote:
our scenario is to commit successful transaction without worry of failed transactions ( these will be logged for verification into error-log-table )

however, the only method for us in java/framework is to put postgresql-checkpoint and do "try-catch, savepoint, statement, on-error rollback to savepoint"



On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas@visena.com> wrote:
På torsdag 18. februar 2016 kl. 11:59:50, skrev Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas@visena.com>:
På torsdag 18. februar 2016 kl. 11:43:36, skrev Sridhar N Bamandlapally <sridhar.bn1@gmail.com>:
The code/framework is written to handle batch inserts, which is common for all databases
 
I feel, PostgreSQL JDBC may need to modify setAutoCommit(false) code to "implicit savepoint - on error - rollback to savepoint"
 
You simply cannot have batch-inserts in the same transaction and expecting the batch not to fail if one of the statements in the batch fails.
 
Note that it's perfectly doable to have a connection-pool configured with autocommit=false and do the transaction-management your self. Then you can do whatever you want when one statement fails. You would want to rollback that statement...
 
--
Andreas Joseph Krogh
CTO / Partner - Visena AS
Mobile: +47 909 56 963
 


Attachment

pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: Sridhar N Bamandlapally
Date:
Subject: Re: JDBC behaviour
Next
From: Vladimir Sitnikov
Date:
Subject: Re: JDBC behaviour