Hi Alexander, I have 2 points.
1. According to the jdbc spec [1] setNetworkTimeout method is optional. What user problem we are going to solve by implementing that method? 2. Also I checked another quite popular jdbc driver provided by MariaDB [2]. They ignore an executor argument as well and set a socket timeout instead. So, I think that we are on a safe side if we ignore an executor. [1] https://download.oracle.com/otndocs/jcp/jdbc-4_2-mrel2-spec/index.html пт, 30 нояб. 2018 г. в 16:28, Alexander Lapin <lapin1...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Igniters, > > Within context of connection timeout [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5234] it's not obvious whether > it's required to use setNetworkTimeout's executor or not. > > According to the javadoc of java.sql.Connection#setNetworkTimeout(Executor > executor, int milliseconds), executor is "The <code>Executor</code> > implementation which will be used by <code>setNetworkTimeout</code>." > Seems that executor supposed to take care of connection closing/aborting in > case of timeout, based on submitted Runnable implementation. On the other > hand it's possible to ignore executor and implement > timeout-detection/cancellation logic with Timer. Something like following > (pseudo-code): > > ConnectionTimeoutTimerTask connectionTimeoutTimerTask = new > ConnectionTimeoutTimerTask(timeout); > timer.schedule(connectionTimeoutTimerTask, 0, REQUEST_TIMEOUT_PERIOD); > ... > JdbcResponse res = cliIo.sendRequest(req); > ... > > private class ConnectionTimeoutTimerTask extends TimerTask { > ... > @Override public void run() { > if (remainingConnectionTimeout <= 0) > close(); //connection.close(); > > remainingConnectionTimeout -= REQUEST_TIMEOUT_PERIOD; > } > ... > } > > It worth to mention that MSSQL Jdbc driver doesn't use executor and > PostgreSQL doesn't implement setNetworkTimeout() at all. > > From my point of view it might be better to ignore executor, is it suitable? > > Any ideas? -- Best regards, Ivan Pavlukhin
