HI,
Iam trying to insert batch of records at a time when any of the record fails to insert i need to trap that record and log that to my failed record maintanance table and then the insert should continue. Kindly help on how to do this.
If using a Spring or EJB container there is a simple trick which works very well : provide a LogService witn a logWarning(String message) method. The method must be annotated/configured with the REQUIRES_NEW transaction setting.
If not then you'll have to simulate it using API calls. Open a different connection for the logging, when you enter the method begin the transaction, before leaving commit the transaction.
When not using transactions for the insert, there is actually nothing special you need to do, as by default most database run in autocommit and commit after every statement.
Related
As a potential way of storing metadata about transactions, I would like to execute a query at end end of every transaction.
I have looked at adding logic inside the transact event, but there does not seem to be a way to make another request using the current transaction. Is there a way that this could be done using pg-promise? Is this an anti-pattern?
You can only query against the transaction connection while inside a transaction callback. You cannot do it by handling transact event, it does not have the transaction connection available.
I have to investigate who or what caused tables rows to disappear.
So, I am thinking about creating "on before delete" trigger that logs the script that invokes the deletion. Is this possible? Can I get the db client name or event better - the script that invokes delete query and log it to another temporarly created log table?
I am open to other solutions, too.
Thanks in advance!
You can't get "the script" which issued the delete statement, but you can get various other information:
current_user will return the current Postgres user that initiated the delete statement
inet_client_addr() will return the IP address of the client's computer
current_query() will return the complete statement that caused the trigger to fire
More details about that kind of of functions are available in the manual:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/functions-info.html
The Postgres Wiki contains two examples of such an audit trigger:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Audit_trigger_91plus
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Audit_trigger (somewhat outdated)
I'm trying to understand how a java (client) application that communicates, through JDBC, with a pgSQL database (server) can "catch" the result produced by a query that will be fired (using a trigger) whenever a record is inserted into a table.
So, to clarify, via JDBC I install a trigger procedure prepared to execute a query whenever a record is inserted into a given database table, and from this query's execution will result an output (wrapped in a resultSet, I suppose). And my problem is that I have no idea how the client will be aware of those results, that are asynchronously produced.
I wonder if JDBC supports any "callback" mechanism able to catch the results produced by a query that is fired through a trigger procedure under the "INSERT INTO table" condition. And if there is no such "callback" mechanism, what is the best approach to achieve this result?
Thank you in advance :)
Triggers can't return a resultset.
There's no way to send such a result to the JDBC driver.
There are a few dirty hacks you can use to get results from a trigger to the client, but they're all exactly that. Things like:
DECLARE a cursor for the resultset, then send the cursor name as a NOTIFY payload, so the app can FETCH ALL FROM <cursorname>;
Create a TEMPORARY table and report the name via NOTIFY
It is more typical to append anything the trigger needs to communicate to the app to a table that exists for that purpose and have the app SELECT from it after the operation that fired the trigger ran.
In most cases if you need to do this, you're probably using a trigger where a regular function is a better fit.
I have a scenario where 2 db connections might both run Model.find_or_initialize_by(params) and raise an error: PG::UniqueViolation: ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint
I'd like to update my code so it could gracefully recover from it. Something like:
record = nil
begin
record = Model.find_or_initialize_by(params)
rescue ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique
record = Model.where(params).first
end
return record
The trouble is that there's not a nice/easy way to reproduce this on my local machine, so I'm not confident that my fix actually works.
So I thought I'd get a bit creative and try calling create 2 times (locally) in a row which should raise then PG::UniqueViolation: ERROR, then I could rescue from it and make sure everything is handled gracefully.
But I get this error: PG::InFailedSqlTransaction: ERROR: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of transaction block
I get this error even when I wrap everything in individual transaction blocks
record = nil
Model.transaction do
record = Model.create(params)
end
begin
Model.transaction do
record = Model.create(params)
end
rescue ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique
end
Model.transaction do
record = Model.where(params).first
end
return record
My questions:
What's the right way to gracefully handle the race condition I mentioned at the very beginning of this post?
How do I test this locally?
I imagine there's probably something simple that I'm missing here, but it's late and perhaps I'm not thinking too clearly.
I'm running postgres 9.3 and rails 4.
EDIT Turns out that find_or_initialize_by should have been find_or_create_by and the errors I was getting was from the actual save call that happened later on in execution. #VeryTiredWhenIWroteThis
Has this actually happenend?
Model.find_or_initialize_by(params)
should never raise an ´ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique´ error as it is not saving anything to db. It just creates a new ActiveRecord.
However in the second snippet you are creating records.
create (without bang) does not throw exceptions caused by validations, but
ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique is always thrown in case of a duplicate by both create and create!
If you're creating records you don't need transactions at all. As Postgres being ACID compliant guarantees that only one of the both operations succeeds and if it responds so it's changes will be durable. (a single statement query against postgres is also a transaction). So your above code is almost fine if you replace through find_or_create_by
begin
record = Model.find_or_create_by(params)
rescue ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique
record = Model.where(params).first
end
You can test if the code behaves correctly by simply trying to create the same record twice in row. However this will not test ActiveRecord::RecordNotUnique is actually thrown correctly on race conditions.
It's also no the responsibility of your app to test and testing it is not easy. You would have to start rails in multithread mode on your machine, or test against a multi process staging rails instance. Webrick for example handles only one request at a time. You can use puma application server, however on MRI there is no true concurrency (GIL). Threads only share the GIL only on IO blocking. Because talking to Postgres is IO, i'd expect some concurrent requests, but to be 100% sure, the best testing scenario would be to deploy on passenger with multiple workers and then use jmeter to run concurrent request agains the server.
I am trying to validate one field through postgres trigger.
If targeted field has value in decimals,i need to through a warning but allowing the user to save the record.
I tried with options
RAISE EXCEPTION,RAISE - USING
but it's throwing error on UI and transaction is aborted.
I tried with options
RAISE NOTICE,RAISE WARNING
through which warning is not shown and record is simply saved.
It would be great if any one help on this.
Thanks in Advance
You need to set client_min_messages to a level that'll show NOTICEs and WARNINGs. You can do this:
At the transaction level with SET LOCAL
At the session level with SET
At the user level with ALTER USER
At the database level with ALTER DATABASE
Globally in postgresql.conf
You must then check for messages from the server after running queries and display them to the user or otherwise handle them. How to do that depends on the database driver you're using, which you haven't specified. PgJDBC? libpq? other?
Note that raising a notice or warning will not cause the transaction to pause and wait for user input. You really don't want to do that. Instead RAISE an EXCEPTION that aborts the transaction. Tell the user about the problem, and re-run the transaction if they approve it, possibly with a flag set to indicate that an exception should not be raised again.
It would be technically possible to have a PL/Perlu, PL/Pythonu, or PL/Java trigger pause execution while it asked the client via a side-channel (like a TCP socket) to approve an action. It'd be a really bad idea, though.