Re: Removing our datasource/pooling implementation.
От | Barry Lind |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Removing our datasource/pooling implementation. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 03E7D3E231BB7B4A915A6581D4296CC6DF118E@NSNOVPS00411.nacio.xythos.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Removing our datasource/pooling implementation. (Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>) |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Kris, I see no reason to keep this around. --Barry -----Original Message----- From: pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Kris Jurka Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 8:49 PM To: pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org Subject: [JDBC] Removing our datasource/pooling implementation. Having received another report[1] of the lack of robustness of our pooling implementation I think we should scrap our datasource and pooling implementation. I previously advocated keeping it around because it "basically worked" and didn't really cost us anything to keep it. Now we're aware that it doesn't really work and I for one don't want to spend time fixing it when there are better options out there. I spent some time today testing jakarta's dbcp[2] and I couldn't find anything our code does that it cannot and there are plenty of additional features. Dynamic pool sizing, removing broken connections, and even statement pooling are available. I was impressed. Would anyone like to make a case for keeping our implementation around? Kris Jurka [1] http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/pgjdbc/bugs/bugupdate.php?1109 [2] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/dbcp/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: