> No, only in Prague.
OK, I will nevertheless try to put all required stuff on my yoga and
test it there and then.
I can't go to two FB-Seminars in 4 days, or my wife will close the
connection without doing a proper commit() :-) Otherwise I'd love to
join there.
If I should make a
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:28 PM, André Knappstein
wrote:
> Did I get that right and you're in
> Siegburg?
No, only in Prague. :(
--
Jiri {x2} Cincura (x2develop.com founder)
http://blog.cincura.net/ | http://www.ID3renamer.com
--
Thanks to SMS-Timing and even more thanks to you.
I'll do some test installs later. Did I get that right and you're in
Siegburg? I'll install and test right there, then.
> OK guys, the new version is out. This work was fully supported by
> SMS-Timing. Big thanks to them.
> http://blog.cincura.n
Default,
planned to monitor some things for possible optimizations, but did not
find the time so far.
General response time and performance and resources consumption of
my C#/Firebird applications is more than fine with the users, so no hurry.
> And just a one quick "research" question. What'
OK guys, the new version is out. This work was fully supported by
SMS-Timing. Big thanks to them.
http://blog.cincura.net/233429-ado-net-provider-for-firebird-4-0-0-0-is-ready/
--
Jiri {x2} Cincura (x2develop.com founder)
http://blog.cincura.net/ | http://www.ID3renamer.com
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Danny Gorton
wrote:
> However, that shouldn't really affect what you're doing much since we're
Yeah, I just like to hear what are others doing and thinking.
> also not considering updating the Firebird provider at this time either.
> The version we have seems t
Thanks for the info Juri. I failed to mention that we're a
cross-platform solution, with Linux being the main one, so I'm more
concerned with compatibility on Mono than on Windows. It will just
require some test cycles we don't have right now.
However, that shouldn't really affect what you're
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Zvjezdan Tomičević wrote:
> Polling with default value
I'm asking to know what "resolution" should the cleanup routine have.
Like if everybody uses lifetime 10s, than resolution 5s is fine, even
10s is fine, though the connection might be in a pool little longer.
I use firebird heavily in sports betting solution, with many simultaneous
connections, in desktop environment, web services and virtually everywhere.
Current deployed version is 2.6.0.0, 3.5 build. No major problems here at
all.
Polling with default value,and for events no polling.
Since DB is hit
And just a one quick "research" question. What's your common
connection lifetime value for pooling? Do you change it or do you use
the default one?
--
Jiri {x2} Cincura (x2develop.com founder)
http://blog.cincura.net/ | http://www.ID3renamer.com
-
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Danny Gorton
wrote:
> If 4.0 backward compatibility is
> OK, then it would be OK
It's probbaly not 100%, but in case you're not relying on some "weird"
behavior you found, you should be OK. You can read:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee941656%28VS.1
I'm not sure about being able to lose 3.5 support. We haven't tested,
or planned to test, migrating forward. If 4.0 backward compatibility is
OK, then it would be OK, though we aren't using any 4.0 language features.
Danny Gorton II
Co-founder
Absolute Power and Control, LLC
www.absolutepowera
on: Jiri Cincura [mailto:disk...@cincura.net]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. November 2013 16:16
> An: For users and developers of the Firebird .NET providers
> Betreff: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Connection pool bug
>
> OK guys. First thanks for the support. It's not an easy change and there&
OK guys. First thanks for the support. It's not an easy change and
there's a lot of code already and I need to squeeze myself in, with my
concept. But here are some first numbers:
* [1] With connection pooling ON and OLD provider the application
gained about 276KB in ~30 minutes.
* [2] With connec
I agree.
Hernán MF
> El 12/11/2013, a las 22:28, Zvjezdan Tomičević escribió:
>
> go ahead. do it properly.
>
>> On Nov 12, 2013 4:08 PM, "Jiri Cincura" wrote:
>> Hi *,
>>
>> I found a bug in connection pool. I *don't* know the root cause. But
>> anyway I think the code there isn't "good"
Sometimes you it's better to make breaking changes than to live with the
mess that results from trying to be too accommodating. I say fix it right.
Danny Gorton II
Co-founder
Absolute Power and Control, LLC
www.absolutepowerandcontrol.com
517-499-9069 (mobile)
On 11/12/2013 10:07 AM, Jiri Cincu
go ahead. do it properly.
On Nov 12, 2013 4:08 PM, "Jiri Cincura" wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> I found a bug in connection pool. I *don't* know the root cause. But
> anyway I think the code there isn't "good" or "nice", so to speak. But
> I currently have an application in front of me, that escalates the
>
Hi *,
I found a bug in connection pool. I *don't* know the root cause. But
anyway I think the code there isn't "good" or "nice", so to speak. But
I currently have an application in front of me, that escalates the
problem, some memory leaks. I think I might go to rewrite the pooling
(I implemented
18 matches
Mail list logo
