"Karel" <Karel@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:75BCD0DE-308F-4F2C-9BFA-0A19F74200C5@microsoft.com...
> One of my web applications threw the exception:
>
> Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to obtaining a
> connection
> from the pool. This may have occurred because all pooled connections were
> in
> use and max pool size was reached.
>
> After an investigation I found no errors in the web application that could
> cause it use more than one sql connection, and i discovered that the
> indexing
> process, which swallowed up many connections, took place at the very
> instant
> of the error. I am suspecting that the max connections was reached as a
> result of the full text indexing process.
>
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
>
>> Why do you think it is unacceptable?
>>
>> SQL FTS spawns many threads to grab as much data as possible
>> simultaneously
>> to make indexing happen as fast as possible.
>>
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
>> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence.
>>
>> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's
>> positions, strategies or opinions.
>>
>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>>
>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>>
>>
>>
>> "Karel" <Karel@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:54AB17DB-A491-48CD-B513-8195EE761F34@microsoft.com...
>> >i created a job that performs indexing. the execution time takes only a
>> > second. i noticed, however, using SQL Profiler that the process opened
>> > 32
>> > connections!
>> >
>> > trace details....
>> >
>> > EventClass: Audit Login
>> > ApplicationName: PKM
>> > NTUserName: System
>> > LoginName: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM
>> >
>> >
>> > this many connections is unacceptable. is this normal behavior for sql
>> > server?
>>
>>
>>

> i created a job that performs indexing. the execution time takes only
> a second. i noticed, however, using SQL Profiler that the process
> opened 32 connections!
>
> trace details....
>
> EventClass: Audit Login
> ApplicationName: PKM
> NTUserName: System
> LoginName: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM
> this many connections is unacceptable. is this normal behavior for sql
> server?
>

> Yeah, i understand what you just said. I'm not accusing the fulltext
> process of tapping into the web app's connection. As far as i know,
> thats just not possible. The problem im having is that the full text
> indexing process eats up all available connections, not allowing
> anything else to connect.
>
> Here is the scenario:
> 1. begin fulltext process: exec sp_fulltext_catalog N'Category',
> N'start_full'
> 2. in query analyzer execute: sp_who2 (view the fulltext process using
> 50+
> connections)
> 3. start the webapp: hit the website and trigger a sql connection.
> result: The web app can't connect. why? because the fulltext process
> used up all of the connections! The web application then times out and
> throws the exception.
>
> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
>
>> PKM uses a different connection pool. It won't exhaust your web
>> application connection pool.
>>
>> --
>> Hilary Cotter
>> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
>> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business
>> intelligence.
>> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent
>> RelevantNoise's positions, strategies or opinions.
>>
>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>> "Karel" <Karel@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:75BCD0DE-308F-4F2C-9BFA-0A19F74200C5@microsoft.com...
>>
>>> One of my web applications threw the exception:
>>>
>>> Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to obtaining a
>>> connection
>>> from the pool. This may have occurred because all pooled connections
>>> were
>>> in
>>> use and max pool size was reached.
>>> After an investigation I found no errors in the web application that
>>> could
>>> cause it use more than one sql connection, and i discovered that the
>>> indexing
>>> process, which swallowed up many connections, took place at the very
>>> instant
>>> of the error. I am suspecting that the max connections was reached
>>> as a
>>> result of the full text indexing process.
>>> "Hilary Cotter" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why do you think it is unacceptable?
>>>>
>>>> SQL FTS spawns many threads to grab as much data as possible
>>>> simultaneously
>>>> to make indexing happen as fast as possible.
>>>> --
>>>> Hilary Cotter
>>>> Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy
>>>> RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business
>>>> intelligence.
>>>> This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent
>>>> RelevantNoise's positions, strategies or opinions.
>>>>
>>>> Looking for a SQL Server replication book?
>>>> http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html
>>>> Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS
>>>> http://www.indexserverfaq.com
>>>> "Karel" <Karel@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:54AB17DB-A491-48CD-B513-8195EE761F34@microsoft.com...
>>>>
>>>>> i created a job that performs indexing. the execution time takes
>>>>> only a
>>>>> second. i noticed, however, using SQL Profiler that the process
>>>>> opened
>>>>> 32
>>>>> connections!
>>>>> trace details....
>>>>>
>>>>> EventClass: Audit Login
>>>>> ApplicationName: PKM
>>>>> NTUserName: System
>>>>> LoginName: NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM
>>>>> this many connections is unacceptable. is this normal behavior for
>>>>> sql server?
>>>>>