[sqlalchemy] Re: sqlalchemy.exceptions.TimeoutError with psycopg2

2007-08-29 Thread jason kirtland
Jian wrote: Hi List: I am just doing a test of my pylons site under medium load. (ab2 -c 20 -n 5000 ...) and got following errors: 2007-08-29 17:32:34,468 INFO [paste.httpserver.ThreadPool] kill_hung_threads status: 10 threads (10 working, 0 idle, 0 starting) ave time 2.24sec, max

[sqlalchemy] Re: sqlalchemy.exceptions.TimeoutError with psycopg2

2007-08-29 Thread Jian Luo
Hi Jason, thanks for the reply. My pylons basecontroller takes care of the session clean up like this: class BaseController(WSGIController): def __call__(self, environ, start_response): try: return WSGIController.__call__(self, environ, start_response) finally:

[sqlalchemy] Re: sqlalchemy.exceptions.TimeoutError with psycopg2

2007-08-29 Thread jason kirtland
Jian wrote: Hi Jason, thanks for the reply. My pylons basecontroller takes care of the session clean up like this: class BaseController(WSGIController): def __call__(self, environ, start_response): try: return WSGIController.__call__(self, environ,

[sqlalchemy] Re: sqlalchemy.exceptions.TimeoutError with psycopg2

2007-08-29 Thread Jian Luo
the remove is described in doc as close + extra cleanup Shouldn't the doc be updated to add that point, which will make the the life of newbies like me easier =D Or better: add the explicitly close in remove. Best Jian On Aug 30, 12:10 am, jason kirtland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jian wrote:

[sqlalchemy] Re: sqlalchemy.exceptions.TimeoutError with psycopg2

2007-08-29 Thread jason kirtland
Jian wrote: the remove is described in doc as close + extra cleanup Shouldn't the doc be updated to add that point, which will make the the life of newbies like me easier =D Or better: add the explicitly close in remove. Yeah, the current remove() implementation in trunk isn't yet in sync

[sqlalchemy] Re: sqlalchemy.exceptions.TimeoutError with psycopg2

2007-08-29 Thread Michael Bayer
Ive committed this fix in r3425. remove() calls close() on an existing session if one is present. On Aug 29, 2007, at 6:49 PM, jason kirtland wrote: Jian wrote: the remove is described in doc as close + extra cleanup Shouldn't the doc be updated to add that point, which will make the