Matt Feifarek wrote:
> | Hmmm. I just noticed that if an exception happens during
> | respond(), sleep()
> | doesn't get called (unless it's the new EndResponse
> | exception which I just
> | added). Should it?
>
> Really not sure. I don't really understand the deep magic of
> the application
> server. Can it hang threads if awake() is called but sleep()
> never? I don't
> really understand how important the symmetry is, but I always
> have tried to
> make sure to keep it "by the book" just in case.
It definitely doesn't hang threads or anything. For the most part the
various objects' sleep() methods mainly just clear out references to other
objects that were saved in attributes. Seems like the worst that would
happen from skipping sleep() is that a cycle might be left behind to be
collected by the garbage collector. But...
>
> When do things like re-pickling the session object happen?
> That's the kind
> of housekeeping that I'm afraid could get short circuited,
> and it would be a
> b*tch to identify and debug.
...this looks like the one exception what I wrote above.
Application.sleep() tells the session store to save the transaction's
session. This is a no-op for the Dynamic and Memory stores because pickling
to disk happens in a background thread in Dynamic, and not at all in Memory
(except on shutdown). But if you're using the File store, then this is
where changes get pickled to disk. So skipping sleep() may cause all
session variable modifications to be lost, but only if you're using the File
store, which is generally a bad idea anyway.
Note: I haven't tested what I wrote above -- this is based on code
inspection only. I might have gotten it wrong.
In any case, I'm starting to lean toward the philosophy of not using awake()
and sleep() at all in my own code. That of course neatly sidesteps the
issue of how endResponse() should be treated in awake() and sleep() :-)
And it does now seem like a bug to me that when exceptions happen, sleep()
is skipped. The current code in Application looks like this:
try:
self.awake(transaction)
try:
self.respond(transaction)
except EndResponse:
pass
self.sleep(transaction)
except EndResponse:
pass
but I think it should look like this:
try:
self.awake(transaction)
try:
try:
self.respond(transaction)
except EndResponse:
pass
finally:
self.sleep(transaction)
except EndResponse:
pass
In other words, if awake() has succeeded, you always call sleep() regardless
of what kind of exception was raised.
- Geoff
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Webware-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
