"Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25.06.2002 18:08
Please respond to "Tomcat Developers List"
To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: Re: JDBCStore implementation
Hello Craig,
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 16:34:12 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: JDBCStore implementation
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I am writing about an issue on invalidation of sessions.
> In the current implementation, a session is deleted from the Database
when
> it is invalidated. Is this really the behavior expected?
>
>
> What purpose would be served by leaving the expired session in the
> database? There is no API that would let a servlet retrieve that data
> again, so wouldn't it just clog up the disk?
Ok, this is true, but what other way do I have to find out if the session
for this request was expired or not? (please check my reply to bob's mail)
> I mean, if there is an attribute to specify if a session is valid or
not,
> a session that is invalidated should have this attribute reset instead
of
> being deleted, isn't it? If this is not true, it is not possible to see
> difference between a session that is not valid anymore and a new one.
>
>
> Identifying a new session versus an old (but still active one) is a
> different question. The in-memory session manager knows this by noting
a
> difference between the created time and the last accessed time (which is
> updated via a call to access()). It looks like JDBCStore isn't saving
the
> created time, or the value of the isNew flag, so there's no way to know
> when the session is reloaded -- that sounds like a reasonable
enhancement.
Well the JDBStore has no way to know this, unless he is saving these
values in BLOB field (I did not check this in the code), because the
attributes in the "sessions" table are not related to creation time; it is
possible to access only the lastacess time.
> Can anyone tell me something about the plans for the implementation of
> this feature?
>
>
> Best way to ensure that this gets done eventually is to submit an
> enhancement request to the bug tracking system:
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/
Thanks for the hint! I'll wait for some replies to be sure that I
really cannot do what I intend to, and if this is true, I'll submit the
request later.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
