Draft for DB2-Trustedcontext implementation #121
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rPraml
commented
Mar 20, 2025
| } | ||
|
|
||
| boolean switchUser(String user, String password) throws SQLException { | ||
| if (!Objects.equals(user, this.user) || !Objects.equals(password, this.password)) { |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This gives a massive performance boost. Switching users take a long time.
Collaborator
Author
|
the stealing approach dead locks... closing this PR |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a draft of the DB2 TrustedContext implementation and to compare with the "Connection stealing" approach in #119
Performance throughputs:
The numbers are the amount of queries, that are executed in the 5s test run.
Note: We test here with 2 tenants for now
If we do a user switch every time in the "Threads=1" case, we drop down to 1300, so user switch is very expensive. (it would be good, if the pool can return a connection, that is already for the correct tenant, which is here ~ 50%. In our real workload, this number would be lower)