Hello Ken! There have been very strongly argumented opinions that the pool should do nothing of the sort, but I'd like to go to the bottom of discussing other alternatives too.
KH> * emulates a legal timeout from the database server I have been stricken with the beauty of approach you have proposed, indeed its nice to emulate a server timeout :-)) I still have one reservation: its synchronization. Does this proposition mean that we have to make all the normal operations on the connections synchronized? I'm afraid something nasty may happen if while the user is executing a lengthy query another thread close()-s the connection. (I'm not concerned that we shall kill legitimate client operation - after all the client should have specified a longer timeout then, I'm concerned that we may upset the driver or something.) Another synchronization issue is that theoretically w/o a synchronization the fact that we have called close() on the connection is not guaranteed to be propagated to the other thread that is probably holding the connection. Unless the db driver does synchronization somewhere underneath of course. What do you think of this synchronization overhead? Negligible? - Anton --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
