You can also use named environments to manage different databases.  And yes,
you'd need a single SqlSessionFactory for each -- but I wouldn't create them
on demand.  I'd instantiate them and keep them resident.

Clinton

2010/3/18 François Schiettecatte <fschietteca...@gmail.com>

> Clinton
>
> Thanks for the information, and indeed my code creating the
> SqlSessionFactoryBuilder() and the SqlSessionFactory() is wrong, which I
> will fix.
>
> However there is an interesting issue around SqlSessionFactory() though,
> when you take into account page 5, SqlSessionFactory() is geared toward
> setting up a factory around a single host name/database name/user name so
> does not work so well if you have multiple databases on multiple hosts.
> Unless there is a way to set configuration XML file property values when I
> create a new session, you have to use SqlSessionFactory().build(reader,
> properties) for each host name/database name/user name you access. Or did I
> miss something here ?
>
> Cheers
>
> François
>
>
> On Mar 17, 2010, at 11:21 PM, Clinton Begin wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what to say... this is not really an iBATIS issue.
> >
> >   * First, you're purposefully going directly against a key part of the
> SqlSession contract.  There's an entire section in the user guide about
> SqlSession lifecycle (Page 9) and you're completely ignoring it.  This makes
> it very difficult to help you.
> >
> >   * Keeping sessions (and therefore connections) open for long durations
> is a very bad practice.  iBATIS won't do anything to help you there.  We
> wrap connections with SqlSessions, thus to abuse one is to abuse the other.
> >
> > So I'm not sure there is any help for your situation.
> >
> > The most curious thing about your claim is that creating an iBATIS 3
> SqlSession is more expensive than creating an iBATIS 2 SqlMapClient.  I find
> that very hard to believe.
> >
> > The creation of the SqlSession is almost nothing.  It's a few class
> instantiations (almost free in modern JVMs), some getter/setter calls, some
> field assignments.  There is one array and one hashmap created (maybe a
> little cost there, but not much).  The most expensive line in the creation
> of a SqlSession is this one:
> >
> >       Connection connection = dataSource.getConnection();
> >
> > This is entirely the cost incurred by your choice of DataSource.
> >
> > Compare that to the iBATIS 2 SqlMapClient, which had to parse XML,
> instantiate various maps, parse inline parameter maps and do tons of string
> manipulation.  I just can't believe that your claim holds true.  I'd love to
> see some numbers on  that one, and a testing approach.  Regardless, both
> creating multiple SqlMapClients and sharing SqlSessions are bad ideas, so
> the exercise would be strictly academic.
> >
> > So in a nutshell, I'm really not sure what I can do for you other than
> say:  Best of luck.
> >
> > You're going far beyond the intended use of iBATIS and breaking clearly
> documented rules.
> >
> > Sorry.
> >
> > Clinton
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2010/3/17 François Schiettecatte <fschietteca...@gmail.com>
> > Hi
> >
> > I have not heard back from anyone on this issue (which I am running
> into), is it a bug or a non-issue?
> >
> > I went back and retested it and I get the "CommunicationsException" with
> the POOLED data source as well (so my original testing was not up to par).
> >
> > For me this will require some amount of rework if I want to minimize the
> performance penalty I wrote about.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > François
> >
> >
> > On Mar 12, 2010, at 3:54 PM, François Schiettecatte wrote:
> >
> > > I did run into some issues with connection pooling. Creating a
> SqlSession() checks out a connection from the pool (I presume) and from what
> I can tell it does not check it back in until you close the session, so
> there is room for connections to timeout if I save them in a hash. With C3P0
> I would get a "CommunicationsException: Communications link failure" when I
> used a connection which had timed out. On the other hand the built-in POOLED
> data source did not have this issue. I was not able to reliably get around
> this issue in C3P0 either by extending the timeout at the server end, or by
> setting up a ping query. Maybe one way to deal with this would be to
> check-out a connection from the pool at the start of a transaction and check
> it back in at the end of the transaction.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to