Re: Removing our datasource/pooling implementation.

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.

Kris Jurka