Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.databases > #146

Re: Connection Pooling

Show key headers only | View raw

  To: comp.lang.java.programmer
On May 27, 9:48 am, "kuassi.men...@gmail.com"
<kuassi.men...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The problem with middle-tier connection pools is that they cannot span
> > > JVMs or midlet0er instances.
>
> > That is not a problem. It is an advantage. Because interacting with pool
> > is then a local call.
>
> The saving of local call to connection pool versus remote call to the
> connection broker, is epsilon compared to the saving in terms of
> resource brought by DRCP.
>
> > >                             Oracle's Database Resident Connecton Pool
> > >http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/php/pdf/php-scalability-ha-twp.pdf
> > > solves this problem; unfortunately it is not (yet) exposed to Java
> > > only PHP and Ruby/Rails (primarily because these are process based not
> > > thread based).
>
> > That solution is used not because it is a better solution, but
> > because the traditional Java/.NET/C++ solution does not work with PHP.
>
> Sure, unlike PHP and other dynamic languages, Java/.NET/C++ are not in
> desperate need for a connection pool.
>
> > You can use DRCP from Java.
>
> Nope, the article you are referring to is wrong; and i am as we speak
> asking the author to fix the misleading JDBC URL with DRCP.
>
> >http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/articles/oracle-database-11g-top...
>
> > describes how to specify the JDBC connection URL.
>
> > I think the interest from Java will be low. A local pool is faster.
>
> I will argue with this opinion. Think about a large web application
> with thousands of middle-tier (let's assume 4000) with each their own
> connection pool. Even if each middle-tier only allocate few
> connections (let's settle for 5); you end up with 20,000 pre-allocated
> connections!!! Assuming that  only 50% of all connections are busy at
> a point in time and that this is not uniform across all middle-tiers
> (how could it be?); you will be wasting 10,000 connections.
>
> Kuassi

Hi Kuassi!

It seems to me that any DBMS-resident 'pooling' or any change that
makes a client's wait to get a new real connection shorter, would
be a good thing, and unless it imposes some new limit on the number
of connections, it seems it would be beneficial independently of
whether there is any pooling at the client side. For any client
architecture and distribution, it would be always important to
design a client-side pool to collect only the number of connections
actually needed by the client, so I would say that the problem of
over pre-allocation can be avoided, and indeed many pool allow a
discharge of unneeded connections after a time limit, so a good
client-side pool can maintain only what it needs.
   Is a DBMS-resident connection 'pooling' a good answer for the
application profile you suggest, with 4000 middle-tier clients,
each averaging 10,000 in-use connections, and a random flux of
making up to 10,000 more as needed and closing them when not?
Joe

---
 * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet!
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92
Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24

Back to comp.lang.java.databases | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: Connection Pooling joeNOSPAM@BEA.com.remove-dii-this - 2011-04-27 15:22 +0000

csiph-web