Why do you want to bring Poolman here? Commons already has a pool and connection pool. In an attempt to allow jakarta-turbine-torque to use any jdbc2 pool, I started looking for an open-source implementation and found none. Poolman and DBCP can be said to have the possibility of presenting a DataSource front end, but neither attempt to implement the specification fully. As PreparedStatement pooling is not addressed until jdbc3, you could say they are both ahead of the curve.
But pushing either of these without attempting to bring them up to at least jdbc2 compliance does not make much sense. I have been working on this for over a month (intermittently, of course) and have received one code submission from another developer, not a commons committer. Craig has submitted a jdbc2 style DataSource (meaning bean-like configuration) example to the DBCP codebase that I think serves as a good example on how to use the DBCP codebase in an easy to configure manner. It does not include much configurability and leaves out statement pooling, however, and it still does not hook into the correct backend for a jdbc2 pool. The code in sandbox/jdbc2pool uses the commons pool and DBCP's PreparedStatement pool while attempting to implement the jdbc2 specification. Geir and anyone else at jakarta who wants to work on a connection pool, why not join me in finishing this? Geir, why are you saying you want to work on Poolman, what does it have that dbcp does not? Yes jakarta developers should be able to work on what they want to work on, but the founding projects of the commons was the pool and dbcp. Yes it is possible to have multiple implementations of these. We have an object pool in turbine that we are still deciding on whether to keep it maintained or dump it for the current commons pool. We had our own dbcp as well, which I do not think anyone wants to maintain as a separate entity even though it works perfectly well. Isn't the point of the commons to not have multiple implementations of the same concept? I have to say I still do not quite understand what the commons is. john mcnally "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > > On 3/6/02 6:32 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The only point to anything at Jakarta is that the volunteers will work > > on what they ~want~ to work on. If there are volunteers here who want to > > work on the dbcp, then we will continue to have a dbcp. If there are > > volunteers here who want to bring Poolman here, then they could do that > > too. > > > > My only point is that the opportunity now exists; it's just a matter of > > whether anyone interested in working on connection pools is interested > > in pursuing the Poolman codebase. > > I've talked to Sean every now and then about bringing Poolman here to > Jakarta, and I have another query on this in to him now. > > I'm going to try and do it. > > geir > > -- > Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > System and Software Consulting > The bytecodes are language independent. - Sam Ruby > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
