Stefan Winter wrote:
If not defining a pool in 3.0, rlm_sql behaves very greedy.
Well... the whole point of the new pool configuration is to use it.
It opened one connection to the server to deliver my SELECT, and immediately closed it again:
It looks like the defaults aren't set when there's no "pool" section. I'll go fix that.
Of course you could say: your bad, why didn't you configure the pool! That's right (and now that I've realised it, I will of course work with pools right away), but it creates surprises for people who just run 3.0 with their 2.1 config. According to -users, that seems to be a popular thing to do, judging from the many 1.x -> 2.x conversions going wrong.
That's why there's raddb/README. It documents how to convert the configuration.
For backwards-compatibility, it might make sense to convert the num_sql_socks statement into a pool block implicitly, like:
num_sql_socks = 2
For various reasons, that's hard to do. And the conversion / upgrade is documented. Alan DeKok.