On Thursday 01 August 2002 16:47, Peter Royal wrote:
> On Thursday 01 August 2002 10:45 am, Torsten Curdt wrote:
> > There are several problems:
> >
> > 1) finalize will only be triggered by the gc. so the components will
> > locked much longer than doing a straight release. (does this kind of
> > pooling still make sense?)
>
> I think you found the problem right there. If you are pooling a limited
> resource, say JDBC connections, you don't want to have to wait for the gc
> to kick in before you can get that connection back from the pool.
>
> If we had deterministic gc, I think it might have a better chance of being
> viable.

aggreed!

...but I was more thinking non-limited pools that exists only to reduce object 
creations. Wouldn't it make sense there?

Thinking about limited pools... would it be cool to have a fall-back 
mechanism? Just a week ago it took me quite some time find out that a 
component did not release a jdbc connection.

With this fallback mechanism I could immediatly have found in the log file 
something like "WARN: releasing unused component..." without testing the pool 
against it's limit.
--
Torsten

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to