C# – Database connection pooling with multi-threaded service

cconnection-poolingmultithreadingservice

I have a .NET 4 C# service that is using the TPL libraries for threading. We recently switched it to also use connection pooling, since one connection was becoming a bottle neck for processing.

Previously, we were using a lock clause to control thread safety on the connection object. As work would back up, the queue would exist as tasks, and many threads (tasks) would be waiting on the lock clause. Now, in most scenarios, threads wait on database IO and work processes MUCH faster.

However, now that I'm using connection pooling, we have a new issue. Once the max number of connections is reached (100 default), if further connections are requested, there is a timeout (see Pooling info). When this happens, an exception is thrown saying "Connection request timed out".

All of my IDisposables are within using statements, and I am properly managing my connections. This scenario happens due to more work being requested than the pool can process (which is expected). I understand why this exception is thrown, and am aware of ways of handling it. A simple retry feels like a hack. I also realize that I can increase the timeout period via the connection string, however that doesn't feel like a solid solution. In the previous design (without pooling), work items would process because of the lock within the application.

What is a good way of handling this scenario to ensure that all work gets processed?

Best Answer

Another approach is to use a semaphore around the code that retrieves connections from the pool (and, hopefully, returns them). A sempahore is like a lock statement, except that it allows a configurable number of requestors at a time, not just one.

Something like this should do:

//Assuming mySemaphore is a semaphore instance, e.g. 
// public static Semaphore mySemaphore = new Semaphore(100,100);
try {
  mySemaphore.WaitOne(); // This will block until a slot is available.
  DosomeDatabaseLogic();
} finally {
  mySemaphore.Release();
}

Related Solutions

C# – Cross-thread operation not valid: Control accessed from a thread other than the thread it was created on

As per Prerak K's update comment (since deleted):

I guess I have not presented the question properly.

Situation is this: I want to load data into a global variable based on the value of a control. I don't want to change the value of a control from the child thread. I'm not going to do it ever from a child thread.

So only accessing the value so that corresponding data can be fetched from the database.

The solution you want then should look like:

UserContrl1_LOadDataMethod()
{
    string name = "";
    if(textbox1.InvokeRequired)
    {
        textbox1.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate { name = textbox1.text; }));
    }
    if(name == "MyName")
    {
        // do whatever
    }
}

Do your serious processing in the separate thread before you attempt to switch back to the control's thread. For example:

UserContrl1_LOadDataMethod()
{
    if(textbox1.text=="MyName") //<<======Now it wont give exception**
    {
        //Load data correspondin to "MyName"
        //Populate a globale variable List<string> which will be
        //bound to grid at some later stage
        if(InvokeRequired)
        {
            // after we've done all the processing, 
            this.Invoke(new MethodInvoker(delegate {
                // load the control with the appropriate data
            }));
            return;
        }
    }
}

Java – Connection pooling options with JDBC: DBCP vs C3P0

DBCP is out of date and not production grade. Some time back we conducted an in-house analysis of the two, creating a test fixture which generated load and concurrency against the two to assess their suitability under real life conditions.

DBCP consistently generated exceptions into our test application and struggled to reach levels of performance which C3P0 was more than capable of handling without any exceptions.

C3P0 also robustly handled DB disconnects and transparent reconnects on resume whereas DBCP never recovered connections if the link was taken out from beneath it. Worse still DBCP was returning Connection objects to the application for which the underlying transport had broken.

Since then we have used C3P0 in 4 major heavy-load consumer web apps and have never looked back.

UPDATE: It turns out that after many years of sitting on a shelf, the Apache Commons folk have taken DBCP out of dormancy and it is now, once again, an actively developed project. Thus my original post may be out of date.

That being said, I haven't yet experienced this new upgraded library's performance, nor heard of it being de-facto in any recent app framework, yet.

Related Topic