DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25372>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25372 auto close idle connections ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-04-21 13:30 ------- > Yes, it does not provide synchronized access. This is up to the connection manager to take care of. Sorry about that, I missed the javadoc at the top. There is, however, one downside to doing the synchronization at a higher level: the lock is held while idle connections are being closed. In other words, no new connections can be made, no connections can be checked out, etc while we're trying to close off old connections. Is socket.close() a fast operation or can it take some time (tens of milliseconds)? If it's slow, we may have to think about this carefully. > It will eventually get GCed if all references to it are lost. But all references to it are not lost: my main thread holds onto the connection manager, which holds onto the idle connection handler. Consider for example an HTTP proxy, implemented using HttpClient: the usage pattern requires lots of arbitrary connections to many different hosts. If nobody calls closeIdleConnections, the tree structure will not get cleaned out and the chances of a http connection being reused are slim (actually, they're high for short bursts, but low over the long run). Am I missing something? Thanks Moh --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
