On 17 September 2015 at 21:53, Philip Martin <philip.mar...@wandisco.com> wrote: > Ivan Zhakov <i...@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
