sorry, I meant "pool the session", I said connections because I was thinking in terms of JCA where each session represents a connection to the repository. btw, if you use the jca connector you can delegate to the container the pooling task.
br, edgar On 6/28/06, Vijay Pandey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks for the reply. When you say "pool the connection", do you mean to say pool the jcr session ? For pooling the jcr session that means there should be no logout on the jcr session? or after logout do we need to return to pool -- (but this doesnt make sense) or do you mean to say pool the "jdbc connections" if we are using SimpleDBPersistenceManager for storing the content? Thanks Vijay On 6/28/06, Edgar Poce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 6/28/06, Vijay Pandey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > it's a good practice to share a single anonymous session for read only > > access if possible, it would reduce the time that write actions will > take. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > it's not thread safe, I think you should pool the connections somehow. > btw, I think that comment is out of date, I'll remove it. AFAIK it's > been a while since transient items are shared among read only > sessions. > > br, > edgar > > > Does it mean to say that 'session' is thread safe at method level for > read > > only operations , or do we have to synchronize the call on session? or > do > > you think should we have a pool of read only sessions ? > > > > Thanks > > Vijay > > > > >
