On 12/14/11 5:10 AM, sebb wrote: > This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations. > > I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the > [Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e. > > Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool > > I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x. > > SharedPoolDataSource.registerPool() creates an instance of > GenericKeyedObjectPool which it configures via the setters; however > the instance is then stored in a KeyedObjectPool, and setters/getters > are not used elsewwhere. > > SImilarly, DriverAdapterCPDS.getPooledConnection creates an instance > of GenericKeyedObjectPool which is then only used via the > KeyedObjectPool interface. > > So: as far as I can tell from DBCP, there is no need to provide > mutable ObjectPool implementations; so long as the pool can be > configured intially, that is sufficient. > > Are there any other existing use cases that I am missing here?
My email access is going to be choppy next couple of days, so I may not respond quickly, but have a look in the not too distant archives for discussion around setFactory. Look at the code that associates a connection pool with a datasource and recent discussion of that code. Phil > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
