On 7/30/07, Matt S Trout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I used to consider it a neat hack. After some time with the internals, > some fun explicitly disabling it within DBIC since it sometimes broke our > reconnect code, and even then discovering I could often solve client mod_perl > problems by removing the line that loaded it from httpd.conf, I reclassified > it was 'awful'.
Your implication is that Apache::DBI doesn't work, as opposed to simply clashing with some of the DBIC code that tries to manage the same connections. It works just fine. It's widely-used and does what it was intended to without known bugs. Apache::DBI provides an important service for people trying to port CGI code to mod_perl, by both making their connections persistent and fixing the most common mistakes in homegrown persistent connections (accidental copying across forks, ping check after inactivity, auto cleanup after crashed requests). The implementation is sneakier than I normally like to see because not requiring client code changes is one of its design goals. For that reason, I wouldn't recommend it to people who are starting fresh with a new codebase and are able to write it specifically for a persistent environment like mod_perl. Most of them will use another tool that already handles connection persistence, like an ORM. If someone out there wants to use DBIC (or another tool that manages its own connections) in the same process as some code that needs Apache::DBI, they should feel free to ask for help on the mod_perl list. I don't think it would be a hard problem to fix. - Perrin _______________________________________________ List: Catalyst@lists.rawmode.org Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.rawmode.org/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/