> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 08:33:19AM -0700, Dr NoName > wrote: > > > A single client should not be able to bring the > entire > > database down. The DB should recognize that the > client > > went down and roll back the transaction. That > would be > > the ideal solution. Anything else we can do to > remedy > > the situation? > > Now wait just a second. The database is not down at > all just because > somebody left a transaction open. The real problem > is that that open > transaction is having some resources locked, right? right, but that's effectively the same thing: users cannot write to the database and in some cases can't even read from it. > I guess the real answer is not to leave transactions > open. If you do > that by design, say because the app shows a data > modification window, > and keeps a transaction open just to be able to save > the changes later, > then you really need to rethink your app design. There is no user interaction in the middle of a transaction. But there are other things we have to do (file system I/O, heavy processing, etc.) Those operations really do need to be interleaved with the DB writes. thanks, Eugene __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
