On Monday 18 March 2013, Aymeric Augustin wrote:
> On 18 mars 2013, at 17:10, Shai Berger wrote:
> > If the persistent connections are thread-local, don't you want to close
> > them anyway when the thread exits?
>
> Yes, do you know how this could be achieved? I haven't found
On 18 maalis, 19:01, Aymeric Augustin
wrote:
> On 18 mars 2013, at 17:10, Shai Berger wrote:
>
> > If the persistent connections are thread-local, don't you want to close them
> > anyway when the thread exits?
>
> Yes, do you know how this
On 18 mars 2013, at 17:10, Shai Berger wrote:
> If the persistent connections are thread-local, don't you want to close them
> anyway when the thread exits?
Yes, do you know how this could be achieved? I haven't found how to hook
on thread termination.
> ... but that fix
On Monday 18 March 2013 16:36:53 Aymeric Augustin wrote:
> By default, the development server creates a new thread for each request it
> handles. Not only does this negate the effect of persistent connections
> (they're thread-local),
> [...]
> 1) Do we want to enable persistent connections in
It sounds like we need a way to tell the worker that we are done sending
requests to it so that the worker can do cleanup (of which db conn close is one
task). This mirrors the previous request_finished "coupling" to
requests_finished.
(OS?) Signal? Sentinel queue/socket/named pipe +
On 28 févr. 2013, at 00:12, Aymeric Augustin
wrote:
> I'm just wondering if 10 minutes is a good default value for CONN_MAX_AGE.
Since I committed the patch, I discovered that persistent connections don't
interact well with runserver.
By default, the
Hello,
I've integrated the feedback received on my initial proposal in a new pull
request:
https://github.com/django/django/pull/733 and I think it's ready for review.
I'm just wondering if 10 minutes is a good default value for CONN_MAX_AGE.
I chose it randomly. Would "unlimited" be better?