Re: [sqlalchemy] Re: using scoped_session in serial mode as well as parallel (multi-threaded) mode

2010-08-12 Thread Michael Bayer

On Aug 12, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Faheem Mitha wrote:

 
 Hi Mike,
 
 Thanks for the response, but I don't follow.
 
 When you say multiple threads are hitting the session you have
 above, which session are you referring to?  There is more than one
 object above that could be called a session. Ie.


I don't actually know, it would require that I have a full install of your 
application for me to run and step through with a debugger to fully understand 
what it's doing. All I can say from here is that the errors you have 
suggest concurrent access to a single psycopg2 connection resource, and that a 
single Session references a single connection when in use.   A MetaData object 
does not, nor does an Engine - only a Session.If you remove all threading 
from your application and the errors go away, then you know you're accessing 
some resource illegally.


 
 Session1 in Session1 = sessionmaker()
 session1 in session1 = Session1(bind=db)
 Session2 in Session2 = scoped_session(sessionmaker())
 
 Let me try to ask a precise question. If I do
 
 Session = scoped_session(sessionmaker())
 
 then is it ok for this Session object to be be passed around
 between multiple threads and used directly as in
 
 Session.commit()
 
 Does this correspond to a single psycopyg2 connection? If it does, and
 this usage is wrong, should I be creating separate sessions within
 each thread like

That's a scoped_session, which is threadsafe.   Everything you call upon it 
will acquire a Session object from a thread local context, and commit() is 
called on that (for information on thread locals, see 
http://docs.python.org/library/threading.html#threading.local.   

If you pass a scoped_session from one thread to another, and the second thread 
calls commit(), the second thread is not affecting the transaction begun by the 
first.   They are two separate transactions.



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this group, send email to sqlalch...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.



Re: [sqlalchemy] Re: using scoped_session in serial mode as well as parallel (multi-threaded) mode

2010-08-12 Thread Michael Bayer

On Aug 12, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Faheem Mitha wrote:

 On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 09:44:04 -0400, Michael Bayer mike...@zzzcomputing.com 
 wrote:
 
 On Aug 12, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Faheem Mitha wrote:
 
 
 Hi Mike,
 
 Thanks for the response, but I don't follow.
 
 When you say multiple threads are hitting the session you have
 above, which session are you referring to?  There is more than one
 object above that could be called a session. Ie.
 
 
 I don't actually know, it would require that I have a full install
  of your application for me to run and step through with a debugger
  to fully understand what it's doing.  All I can say from here is
  that the errors you have suggest concurrent access to a single
  psycopg2 connection resource, and that a single Session references a
  single connection when in use.  A MetaData object does not, nor does
  an Engine - only a Session.  If you remove all threading from your
  application and the errors go away, then you know you're accessing
  some resource illegally.
 
 Yes, I see. Yes, the error does not show up unless I run multiple
 threads, and I agree with your interpretation.
 
 If MetaData is threadsafe, then using ThreadLocalMetaData is not
 necessary?

ThreadLocalMetaData is not necessary and is not used for this purpose.

 
 Ok. Thanks for the confirmation. So, if I was to use scoped sessions
 systematically everywhere, this problem would likely disappear.

that's not necessarily true - if you share individual persistent objects among 
threads, they reference their owning session in order to load additional state. 
  If you pass objects between threads you should merge() them into the current 
thread's session first, then use that result.


 Can
 you confirm that there is no reason not to use scoped sessions
 everywhere, even in serial execution? Of course, if that is the case,
 then I wonder why non-scoped sessions are used at all.

scoped_sessions are usually the default choice for web applications since they 
desire distinct transactions and object state for individual threads.They 
are overkill and potentially confusing or inappropriate in other situations, 
however.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this group, send email to sqlalch...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.



Re: [sqlalchemy] Re: using scoped_session in serial mode as well as parallel (multi-threaded) mode

2010-08-12 Thread Michael Bayer

On Aug 12, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Faheem Mitha wrote:

  objects among threads, they reference their owning session in order
  to load additional state.  If you pass objects between threads you
  should merge() them into the current thread's session first, then
  use that result.
 
 I see. That's very enlightening. Can one query such objects to
 determine their owning session? Some attribute, perhaps?

see http://www.sqlalchemy.org/docs/session.html#frequently-asked-questions


 
 Can you confirm that there is no reason not to use scoped sessions
 everywhere, even in serial execution? Of course, if that is the
 case, then I wonder why non-scoped sessions are used at all.
 
 scoped_sessions are usually the default choice for web applications
  since they desire distinct transactions and object state for
  individual threads.  They are overkill and potentially confusing or
  inappropriate in other situations, however.
 
 I'm not sure why they would be potentially confusing. What are some of
 the downsides? I'd have thought that not having shared state was less
 confusing.

the scoped_session is a proxy object to the real object.  It is less 
confusing for those unfamiliar with thread locals and proxy objects to deal 
with a Session directly.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
sqlalchemy group.
To post to this group, send email to sqlalch...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.