ChristopherSchultz commented on PR #596: URL: https://github.com/apache/tomcat/pull/596#issuecomment-1464952161
I've been thinking about this more and I think it could cause problems for people not using appId+sessionId (or just sessionId) as the primary key for the DB table storing the sessions. `INSERT` and `DELETE` are not required to include a value for the PK. Some databases can automatically-allocate a value for that purpose and so the existing `DELETE`+`INSERT` scheme works for them. But the `SELECT ... FOR UPDATE` will not because it does not include the table's PK. One way to fix this would be to add an optional PK column (columns?) to the configuration. I think this is pretty important, because databases which use PK-indexed organization (SQL Server, InnoDB, and others) will thrash-around if appId+sessionId are the PK columns, so anybody using those kinds of DBs would likely choose a separate PK column that doesn't cause those ugly performance problems. Any other thoughts? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
