On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 13:29, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Thomas E Jenkins hat gesagt: // Thomas E Jenkins wrote:
> > The only way I found to prevent these stale connections is to explicitly
> > build a new one for every group of DB operations.  That of course throws
> > away any connection pooling you can do.  You may also want to look at
> > David Rushby's resilient DBPool and see if you can make more progress
> > than I in implementing a MySQL version.  The message can be found here:
> > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=5761200
> 
> Well, I'm using SQLObject, so I'm dependent on SQLObject's pooling
> (maybe this can be switched off, though, I didn't look). I'm really
> considering to switch to Postgresql now, which is possible thanks to
> the abstraction provided by SQLObject, but it still would be a major
> step. I'm wondering, if this could help, or if I'd just take my
> problems to another backend... ?!

Postgres definitely does not exhibit this behavior.  Since I inherited a
lot of databases I have a fair mix of both MySQL and Postgres.  I
struggled for a long time with MySQL lost connection problems hanging
the app server, however once I switched all the MySQL operations to use
built on demand connections the problems have disappeared completely. 
For the Postgres DBs I still use connection sharing leaving an odd mix
of both.

-- 
Thomas E Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
_______________________________________________
Webware-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss

Reply via email to