Carlo: Please see note at the bottom...
On 02/05/13 04:36, Carlo Stonebanks wrote:
There are no client poolers (unless pgtcl has one I don't know about) so
this is unlikely.
The trigger is an interesting idea to try if it happens again - I can't keep
it for long as it is for a massive cache (used to deflect calls to a web
service) and will bloat the logs pretty quickly.
I have to ask myself, is it more likely that I have discovered some PG
anomaly in 9.0 that no one has ever noticed, or that the client has
accidentally launched the process twice and doesn't know it?
-----Original Message-----
From: Merlin Moncure [mailto:mmoncure@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: May 1, 2013 11:37 AM
To: Carlo Stonebanks
Cc: Steven Schlansker; pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Simple SQL INSERT to avoid duplication failed: why?
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Carlo Stonebanks
<stonec.register@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Very good to know, Steve. We're on 9.0 right now but I will
investigate as all the work is for unattended automatic processes
which are continuously streaming data from multiple resources and need
to resolve these collisions by themselves.
If it was me, I'd be putting a 'before' statement level trigger on the table
to raise a warning into the log with the backend pid assuming I could handle
the volume. There are lots of ways the client could turn out to be wrong,
for example client side connection poolers (which I tend to hate). Only
when it's 100% proven this is a single backend case (which none of us really
believe is the case including you) is further research justified.
merlin
Please do not top post, posting replies at the bottom, or interspersed
with previous comments, is the norm in these lists - and generally mote
useful, as we can read first what you are replying too!
Cheers,
Gavin
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
