On 17 September 2015 at 21:53, Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> Ivan Zhakov <ivan_at_visualsvn.com> writes:
>
>> I think now is good moment to discuss whether we should merge
>> ra-reuse-session [1] branch to trunk or not: it's better to merge such
>> branch in the beginning of release cycle, to have more time to test
>> and dogfood.
>
> +1 to merge.
>
>> Cons:
>> - In makes behavior less stable. RA session pool doesn't reuse
>> sessions that was unused for some time to avoid timeout issues
>> - There is the chance that we will try to reuse 'broken' RA session
>> due the bug and operation will fail
>
> Do you have a plan to fix this?
I don't have specific to fix bug that didn't happen. But if we got one
we have two directions:
- Do not release RA session back to pool in specific case where we get it broken
- Make RA session more resilent to errors. There is no reason why
ra_svn cannot reconnect after TCP connection times out or something.
> Detect the error from a broken RA
> session and create another? Track the time when the session was last
> used? Something else?
>
Current implementation tracks last time when session was used and do
not reuse RA sessions that was inactive for 5 minutes.
--
Ivan Zhakov
Received on 2015-09-18 00:09:07 CEST