11.01.2018, 21:42, "Tom Isaacson" <tom.isaac...@navico.com>: > But is it a performance issue, a potential threading problem, what? > > We have a large codebase and this practice hasn't been followed, I'm > wondering what the potential impact is and whether it's worth fixing.
If your QNAM objects use different settings (ssl configuration, proxy, HTTP version, ...) or are used for accessing different domains, it's probably fine to continue using separate objects. > > Thanks. > > Tom Isaacson > > On Wednesday, 10 January 2018 20:26:16 PST Tom Isaacson wrote: >> There’s a comment in the QNetworkAccessManager help: >> “One QNetworkAccessManager should be enough for the whole Qt application.” >> >> There are several discussions online about whether this is a >> requirement or just a recommendation. Consensus seems to be that it’s >> a recommendation but what’s the best practice? > > It's a suggestion. And there's a good reason for it being a suggested: it's > the best practice. > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
