[mapguide-internals] RE: PATCH: Raster stability fixes, ticket #462

[Bruce Dechant]

I totally agree - the locking needs to be in the provider.

Thanks,
Bruce


-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Traian Stanev
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 9:40 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: PATCH: Raster stability fixes, ticket #462


It does look like a sledgehammer approach -- what if some day there is a raster provider that works ok and doesn't need the locks? If anything, the lock should be in the FDO provider.

Traian


-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Walt Welton-Lair
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 11:11 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: [mapguide-internals] RE: PATCH: Raster stability fixes, ticket #462

The memory patch (mapguide_raster_unalloc.5.patch) looks good, and I'll submit that.

The stability patch (mapguide_raster_stability.patch) looks reasonable, but I'd like another 1 or 2 people to also look at it.  It's significant since it limits MapGuide to processing one raster stylization request at a time, but I guess that's better than having a dead lock.  Anyone know where the thread-unsafe code actually is?  Is it in the provider itself?  Can the mutex be moved closer to the actual thread-unsafe code?

Walt

-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 3:10 AM
To: mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: [mapguide-internals] PATCH: Raster stability fixes, ticket #462

Hi,

Haris has been working on the raster stability problem against MapGuide 2.0.2.  I was having the same problems, and was able to duplicate on 2.1.  I have worked with Haris to create patches against trunk that address a couple of the problems and increase stability immensely.

Could someone please review the patches attached to:

http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/ticket/462

and commit them to trunk if appropriate?

My feeling is that the connection management stuff may need some additional work, since limiting the connection pool to 1 for single-threaded providers doesn't appear to have the desired effect.  However, getting both of these patches into 2.1 would at least improve stability for Raster users.

Jason_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals