Re: Connection.setsavepoint() / releaseSavepoint() is not thread-safe - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc
From | Dave Cramer |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Connection.setsavepoint() / releaseSavepoint() is not thread-safe |
Date | |
Msg-id | CADK3HHJAqztqKGrcZqO5H0UFjpQsoHOZFTzMpJtmZoRykvkwYg@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Connection.setsavepoint() / releaseSavepoint() is not thread-safe (Christian Schlichtherle <christian@schlichtherle.de>) |
Responses |
Re: Connection.setsavepoint() / releaseSavepoint() is not
thread-safe
|
List | pgsql-jdbc |
I don't think this is a JDBC issue. Rather a limitation of the postgresql server.
On 4 July 2014 05:05, Christian Schlichtherle <christian@schlichtherle.de> wrote:
I have refined the test as follows:package cpssd.db;import org.junit.Test;import java.sql.Connection;import java.sql.DriverManager;import java.sql.SQLException;import java.sql.Savepoint;import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch;/*** See issue #251 at* and the corresponding PostgreSQL issue #10847.** @author Christian Schlichtherle*/public class Ticket251IT {private static final String CONNECTION_STRING = "jdbc:postgresql:postgres";private static final int NUM_THREADS = 8;@Test public void foo() throws SQLException, InterruptedException {try (Connection c = DriverManager.getConnection(CONNECTION_STRING)) {c.setAutoCommit(false);final Runnable task = new Runnable() {final CountDownLatch startSignal = new CountDownLatch(NUM_THREADS);@Override public void run() {try {// TODO: Once the bug in PostgreSQL has been fixed, the// synchronized (c) statement can get removed.Savepoint sp;synchronized (c) {sp = c.setSavepoint();}try {// Insert transaction script here...startSignal.countDown();startSignal.await();} finally {synchronized (c) {c.releaseSavepoint(sp);}}} catch (SQLException | InterruptedException e) {e.printStackTrace();}}};final Thread[] threads = new Thread[NUM_THREADS];for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++)(threads[i] = new Thread(task)).start();for (Thread thread : threads)thread.join();}}}As you can see, I am now synchronizing all access on the connection. However, when running this test, every now and then it produces output like the following:org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of transaction blockat cpssd.db.Ticket251IT$1.run(Ticket251IT.java:43)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2161)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processResults(QueryExecutorImpl.java:1890)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.execute(QueryExecutorImpl.java:255)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.execute(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:559)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.executeWithFlags(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:403)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.execSQLUpdate(AbstractJdbc2Connection.java:376)
at org.postgresql.jdbc3.AbstractJdbc3Connection.releaseSavepoint(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:192)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of transaction blockat cpssd.db.Ticket251IT$1.run(Ticket251IT.java:43)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2161)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processResults(QueryExecutorImpl.java:1890)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.execute(QueryExecutorImpl.java:255)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.execute(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:559)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.executeWithFlags(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:403)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.execSQLUpdate(AbstractJdbc2Connection.java:376)
at org.postgresql.jdbc3.AbstractJdbc3Connection.releaseSavepoint(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:192)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of transaction blockat cpssd.db.Ticket251IT$1.run(Ticket251IT.java:43)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2161)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processResults(QueryExecutorImpl.java:1890)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.execute(QueryExecutorImpl.java:255)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.execute(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:559)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.executeWithFlags(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:403)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.execSQLUpdate(AbstractJdbc2Connection.java:376)
at org.postgresql.jdbc3.AbstractJdbc3Connection.releaseSavepoint(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:192)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)at cpssd.db.Ticket251IT$1.run(Ticket251IT.java:43)
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: no such savepoint
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2161)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processResults(QueryExecutorImpl.java:1890)
at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.execute(QueryExecutorImpl.java:255)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.execute(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:559)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.executeWithFlags(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:403)
at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.execSQLUpdate(AbstractJdbc2Connection.java:376)
at org.postgresql.jdbc3.AbstractJdbc3Connection.releaseSavepoint(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:192)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)Regards,Christian SchlichtherleAm 04.07.2014 um 10:10 schrieb Christian Schlichtherle <christian@schlichtherle.de>:Hi everyone,I have already posted this bug as #10847 to pqsql-bugs@postgresql.org, but was redirected here:The following test code…import org.junit.Test; import java.sql.Connection; import java.sql.DriverManager; import java.sql.SQLException; import java.sql.Savepoint; import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch; /** @author Christian Schlichtherle */ public class Ticket251IT { private static final String CONNECTION_STRING = "jdbc:postgresql:postgres"; private static final int NUM_THREADS = 2; @Test public void foo() throws SQLException, InterruptedException { try (Connection c = DriverManager.getConnection(CONNECTION_STRING)) { c.setAutoCommit(false); final Runnable task = new Runnable() { final CountDownLatch startSignal = new CountDownLatch(NUM_THREADS); @Override public void run() { try { startSignal.countDown(); startSignal.await(); // FIXME: This idiom doesn't work on a shared connection! Savepoint sp = c.setSavepoint(); try { // Insert transaction script here... } finally { c.releaseSavepoint(sp); } } catch (SQLException | InterruptedException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } }; final Thread[] threads = new Thread[NUM_THREADS]; for (int i = 0; i < threads.length; i++) (threads[i] = new Thread(task)).start(); for (Thread thread : threads) thread.join(); }, } }
…frequently produces the following output…org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: no such savepointat org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.receiveErrorResponse(QueryExecutorImpl.java:2161)at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.processResults(QueryExecutorImpl.java:1890)at org.postgresql.core.v3.QueryExecutorImpl.execute(QueryExecutorImpl.java:255)at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.execute(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:559)at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Statement.executeWithFlags(AbstractJdbc2Statement.java:403)at org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.execSQLUpdate(AbstractJdbc2Connection.java:376)at org.postgresql.jdbc3.AbstractJdbc3Connection.releaseSavepoint(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:192)at cpssd.db.Ticket251IT$1.run(Ticket251IT.java:32)at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
The obvious workaround is to put all calls on the connection into a synchronized (whatever) { … } block. However, although the workaround works fine when applied to this isolated test case, it fails in my production code. I have yet to find out why that is. Nevertheless, this seems to be a bug in the JDBC driver.The real use case behind this simplified test case is to distribute work to multiple threads. A parent thread creates the connection and starts a transaction, then spawns a number of child threads. Each child thread creates a save point, does its work and releases or rolls back the save point again. If all child threads succeed, the parent thread then commits the entire transaction. I figure from this document that this is indeed „fair use“ of a Connection. Thus, it would be superb if PostgreSQL could support it.Regards,Christian Schlichtherle
pgsql-jdbc by date: