Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Connection pool bug

[André L. <a.l...@xs...>]

For me it's ok dropping 3.5 support - we took 4.0 when 2.0 support was
dropped.

4.0 support would be very appreciated.

I'll take a look right after delivering our update end of the week.

Thank you for your work!

André Litfin 


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jiri Cincura [mailto:di...@ci...]
> 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'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 connection pooling OFF and OLD provider the application gained
> 324 bytes in ~30 minutes.
> * [3] With connection pooling ON and OLD provider and explicitly cleaning
the
> pool the application gained about 1KB in ~33 minutes.
> * [4] With connection pooling ON and NEW provider the application
> *lost* about 2KB in ~30 minutes.
> 
> The application I'm using is not 100% deterministic. It's doing network
> requests and running some timers. So it pretty much depends when the
> snapshot was taken. I think results are looking good. The [2] and [4] are
> basically same, similar [3] and [4].
> 
> The tests are all green and the test application (obviously) is not
crashing.
> That gives me like 50% confidence. :) You can find the build here
> https://copy.com/Jh2ebP2sPjyv (.NET 4.5). It has same version number, it's
> using same sources, only the connection pooling has been altered. Thus you
> can just drop it in your application and try it run.
> Or create new and stress it. Whatever you want. I'd like to hear feedback
> from your. Even if it's just one quick run, let me know. It will speed up
the
> deploy greatly.
> 
> Also. Backporting the feature to .NET 4.0 is going to be easy. To 3.5
harder,
> because I rely on ConcurrentDictionary that's in 4.0 and newer. Bummer.
> Ideas? Drop 3.5 support? I can implement it on my own with locking (just
for
> 3.5), but is it worth it?
> 
> --
> Jiri {x2} Cincura (x2develop.com founder) http://blog.cincura.net/ |
> http://www.ID3renamer.com
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> DreamFactory - Open Source REST & JSON Services for HTML5 & Native Apps
> OAuth, Users, Roles, SQL, NoSQL, BLOB Storage and External API Access Free
> app hosting. Or install the open source package on any LAMP server.
> Sign up and see examples for AngularJS, jQuery, Sencha Touch and Native!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=63469471&iu=/4140/ostg.clk
> trk
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider