Hi Ivan, Vladimir, @Ivan
> 1. According to the jdbc spec [1] setNetworkTimeout method is > optional. What user problem we are going to solve by implementing that > method? > We are going to give user an ability to set custom connection timeout. > Also I checked another quite popular jdbc driver provided by > MariaDB [2]. They ignore an executor argument as well and set a socket > timeout instead. So, I think that we are on a safe side if we ignore > an executor. > Got it. Thank you! So, I'll implemented connection timeout with the help of socket timeout ignoring an executor. Thanks, Alexander пн, 3 дек. 2018 г. в 00:41, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com>: > +1 > > вс, 2 дек. 2018 г. в 18:39, Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>: > > > Missing ref: > > [2] > > > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.mariadb.jdbc/mariadb-java-client/2.3.0 > > > > 2018-12-02 18:31 GMT+03:00, Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>: > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > > > I have 2 points. > > > > > > 1. According to the jdbc spec [1] setNetworkTimeout method is > > > optional. What user problem we are going to solve by implementing that > > > method? > > > 2. Also I checked another quite popular jdbc driver provided by > > > MariaDB [2]. They ignore an executor argument as well and set a socket > > > timeout instead. So, I think that we are on a safe side if we ignore > > > an executor. > > > > > > [1] > > https://download.oracle.com/otndocs/jcp/jdbc-4_2-mrel2-spec/index.html > > > пт, 30 нояб. 2018 г. в 16:28, Alexander Lapin <lapin1...@gmail.com>: > > >> > > >> Hi Igniters, > > >> > > >> Within context of connection timeout [ > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5234] it's not obvious > > >> whether > > >> it's required to use setNetworkTimeout's executor or not. > > >> > > >> According to the javadoc of > > >> java.sql.Connection#setNetworkTimeout(Executor > > >> executor, int milliseconds), executor is "The <code>Executor</code> > > >> implementation which will be used by <code>setNetworkTimeout</code>." > > >> Seems that executor supposed to take care of connection > closing/aborting > > >> in > > >> case of timeout, based on submitted Runnable implementation. On the > > other > > >> hand it's possible to ignore executor and implement > > >> timeout-detection/cancellation logic with Timer. Something like > > following > > >> (pseudo-code): > > >> > > >> ConnectionTimeoutTimerTask connectionTimeoutTimerTask = new > > >> ConnectionTimeoutTimerTask(timeout); > > >> timer.schedule(connectionTimeoutTimerTask, 0, REQUEST_TIMEOUT_PERIOD); > > >> ... > > >> JdbcResponse res = cliIo.sendRequest(req); > > >> ... > > >> > > >> private class ConnectionTimeoutTimerTask extends TimerTask { > > >> ... > > >> @Override public void run() { > > >> if (remainingConnectionTimeout <= 0) > > >> close(); //connection.close(); > > >> > > >> remainingConnectionTimeout -= REQUEST_TIMEOUT_PERIOD; > > >> } > > >> ... > > >> } > > >> > > >> It worth to mention that MSSQL Jdbc driver doesn't use executor and > > >> PostgreSQL doesn't implement setNetworkTimeout() at all. > > >> > > >> From my point of view it might be better to ignore executor, is it > > >> suitable? > > >> > > >> Any ideas? > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > >
