Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-torque-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 14194 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2006 06:58:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Mar 2006 06:58:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 29819 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2006 06:58:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-torque-user-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 29797 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2006 06:58:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact torque-user-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Apache Torque Users List" Reply-To: "Apache Torque Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list torque-user@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 29786 invoked by uid 99); 24 Mar 2006 06:58:07 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:58:07 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [209.237.227.194] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (209.237.227.194) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:58:07 -0800 Received: (qmail 14092 invoked by uid 1977); 24 Mar 2006 06:57:46 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 24 Mar 2006 06:57:46 -0000 Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 22:57:46 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Fischer To: Apache Torque Users List Subject: Re:Torque Connection pool .. ORA- 01453 - Set Transaction must be the first statement Message-ID: <20060323225635.E13446@minotaur.apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Rating: localhost 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, Torque uses transaction internally. However, from all I've seen so far, Torque does a good job in committing the Transactions it opens (I've never heard of problems there). However, there is a bug in dbcp if you use a transaction isolation other than READ_COMMITTED and verify the connection using a verify statement. I've seen it myself when setting the transaction isolation to SERIALIZABLE. There is a bug report both in Torque's Scarab issue tracker and in dbcp's bugzilla (however, at the moment at least scarab is unusable because of problems on the issues.apache.org machine, I'm afraid). The other thing which could happen is anything which could make a try...finally block fail. This would have to be something like the operating system killing a thread, it does not normally happen in java. Hope this helps, Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-user-unsubscribe@db.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: torque-user-help@db.apache.org