[Proxool-developer] Re: Proxool behavior when max connection reached
UNMAINTAINED!
Brought to you by:
billhorsman
From: Craig S. <cs...@cr...> - 2004-10-08 05:58:01
|
I am following up on an old thread about causing calling threads to wait for a connection rather than getting an Exception. It looks like this has not been done in CVS yet. Has anyone looked at doing this? If not, since I need the behavior, I will try to work on it. But, I do not want to repeat work so I thought I would ask before I tried to add that feature. Craig On Saturday 15 May 2004 03:40 pm, Bertrand Renuart wrote: > Thanks for your information Craig. > > Work has already started on this feature together with some other > refactoring. > I don't know yet when it will be released but part of it may be available > soon in CVS. Keep listening on proxool-dev mailing list - I'll post a > message when it will start becoming available. > > -bertrand > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pro...@li... > [mailto:pro...@li...] On Behalf Of Craig > Servin > Sent: samedi 15 mai 2004 21:45 > To: pro...@li... > Subject: [Proxool-developer] Re: Proxool behavior when max connection > reached > > > Has any work been done on this. I need a similar behavior and might try to > implement it, but I do not want to duplicate effort. > > It seems that you would not need to more settings you would just need an > allowed to wait count which if it was not 0 would make your normal limit > your > soft limit and then add to it for the hard limit. > > It looks like there are only 2 spots in the code that would need to be > changed, but since the current code tries very hard not to synchronize I am > not sure of the best way to do this. It would seem that if you would allow > for threads to wait you would want to synchronize at that point and then > notify the threads as a connection is returned. You could simply check > for > > that feature being tunred on and only synchronize then, but you would have > to > make sure that if you hot change the settings to disable the waiting that > you > notify the waiting threads. > > > > Craig |