On 03/11/2015 03:37 PM, Mike Bayer wrote: > > > Mike Perez <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 11:49 Wed 11 Mar , Walter A. Boring IV wrote: >>> We have this patch in review currently. I think this one should >>> 'fix' it no? >>> >>> Please review. >>> >>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/163551/ >> >> Looks like it to me. Would appreciate a +1 from Mike Bayer before we push >> this >> through. Thanks for all your time on this Mike. > > I have a question there, since I don’t know the scope of “Base”, that this > “Base” constructor is generally called once per Python process. It’s OK if > it’s > called a little more than that, but if it’s called on like every service > request or something, then those engine.dispose() calls are not the right > approach, you’d instead just turn off pooling altogether, because otherwise > you’re spending tons of time creating and destroying connection pools that > aren’t even used as pools. you want the “engine” to be re-used across > requests and everything else as much as possible, *except* across process > boundaries. >
I don't see it used anywhere that isn't a long-standing service, it's only used by service and API managers, and BackupDrivers. So should be ok in this regard. __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
