Re: Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable
From: Patrice (nobody_at_nowhere.com)
Date: 04/16/04
- Next message: Martin Dechev: "Re: Server Application Unavailable - aspnet_wp.exe could not be started. HRESULT for the failure: 80004005"
- Previous message: Andrew Banks: "Re: Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable"
- In reply to: Rolf Gossen: "Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable"
- Next in thread: Hans Kesting: "Re: Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 13:55:49 +0200
It forces each user to work its own connection. Instead the recommended
approach is AFAIK still to "create" a connection at the beginning of each
page and to release it after...
With the pooling feature provided by ADO.NET, when you "create" a connection
it is actually taken from a pool and returned to this pool when you
"destroy" it. With this approach "creating" a new connection is quick (as it
is actually taken from a pool) and x users can be serviced using a much
lower number of connections (as each user will "borrow" a connection from
the pool just during the period it really needs one).
Patrice
"Rolf Gossen" <rolf.gossen@gmx.de> a écrit dans le message de
news:d30e195.0404160340.4df85abd@posting.google.com...
> Hello NG,
>
> sometimes I read: "Never store an SqlClient.SqlConnection in a Session
> Variable." But noone explains why. Is there anyone who can briefly
> summarize the main problems about this approach.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Rolf
- Next message: Martin Dechev: "Re: Server Application Unavailable - aspnet_wp.exe could not be started. HRESULT for the failure: 80004005"
- Previous message: Andrew Banks: "Re: Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable"
- In reply to: Rolf Gossen: "Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable"
- Next in thread: Hans Kesting: "Re: Store SqlConnection in SessionVariable"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|