Oh yea, at runtime, I'm getting back a BasicDataSource object for my
DataSource. Is that correct?

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Salil Apte <[email protected]> wrote:
> So I started actually looking at performance today and it is pretty
> horrendous. I've got about 61,000 rows in my database which I'm
> assuming isn't *that* many rows. But recommendations are taking > 20
> seconds. Is there some way to ensure pooling is turned on? What else
> is a big driver for performance? My tables are setup so that I have a
> multiple index (for uniqueness) for <user_id, item_id> pairs. That
> way, there cannot be two entries with the same <user_id, item_id>. I'm
> not sure where to go from here.
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> You can ignore it. It just doesn't know for sure you have a pool.
>> I believe I have even removed this in a recent refactoring.
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Salil Apte <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> So I keep getting this warning from either Mahout or the server (I'm
>>> guessing the former):
>>>
>>> WARNING: You are not using ConnectionPoolDataSource. Make sure your
>>> DataSource pools connections to the database itself, or database
>>> performance will be severely reduced.
>>>
>>> I'm not really sure why this is happening. I have the following
>>> resource in my webapp's context.xml file. Is there anything else I
>>> need to do enable connection pooling with a  JNDI resource?
>>>
>>> <Resource name="jdbc/offline-local" auth="Container"
>>> type="javax.sql.DataSource" username="root" password=""
>>> driverClassName="com.mysql.jdbc.Driver"
>>>
>>> url="jdbc:mysql://localhost:3306/offlinedevel?autoReconnect=true&amp;cachePreparedStatements=true&amp;cachePrepStmts=true&amp;cacheResultSetMetadata=true&amp;alwaysSendSetIsolation=false&amp;elideSetAutoCommits=true"
>>> validationQuery="select 1" maxActive="16" maxIdle="4"
>>> removeAbandoned="true" logAbandoned="true" />
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> -Salil
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to