I thought at one time that calling create_engine multiple times with the same connection string would return the same engine.
Now it seems that I get a different engine each time, and hence a different connection pool, so my Paste based application eventually consumes all available database connections (firebird) Also, I think when an engine is garbage collected, it's not closing the connections in the pool. At least in my case, I was only saving the most recently returned value from create_engine on each web request.. and I was getting a new pool every time.. Yet firebird connections never got closed even though those connections were returned to the pool. (checked using echo_pool=True) Are engines referenced somewhere else in sqlalchemy, hence keeping them from being garbage collected? I see the same symptoms using plain or threadlocal strategy. I am using explicit code in wsgi middleware to handle transactions engine = some_user_method connection = engine.connect trans = connection.begin session = create_session(bind_to=connection) .. later I trans.commit() connection.close() discard references to session, trans and connection (I don't keep a reference to the engine) -- So back to the original question, did at one time create_engine return the same engine object for same connection string? -- Brad Clements, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (315)268-1000 http://www.murkworks.com AOL-IM or SKYPE: BKClements ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Sqlalchemy-users mailing list Sqlalchemy-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlalchemy-users
