Re: Removing our datasource/pooling implementation.

Kris Jurka wrote:
>
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Oliver Jowett wrote:
>
>>I use our plain DataSource and ConnectionPoolDataSource implementations.
>>Please keep them; the CPDS, especially, has scope to do driver-specific
>>work (consider RESET CONNECTION on proxy connection close()) that can't
>>be done at a higher level easily.
>
> The real problems seem to be in our PooledConnection implemention which is
> what I really wanted to get rid of.  Since that's needed for CPDS I've
> kept the pooling datasource implementation, but updated the documentation
> to more strongly recommend against using it.

What needs fixing in our PooledConnection implementation? I can take a
look at repairing whatever concerns you. I haven't noticed any problems
myself, but our app hardly exercises the whole class..

-O