[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1050?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12539212
]
Padraic Hannon commented on JCR-1050:
-------------------------------------
Based on benchmarks using the DerbyPooledManager (the oracle ones where
terrible! I have no idea what I was thinking) I am going to close this issue as
I do not think that the problem of synchronization can be handled at this
level. Using the ConcurrentReadWrite test I had almost the same number of
operations with both the synchronized derbymanager and this pooled one.
> Remove synchronization from JNDI data sources
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-1050
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1050
> Project: Jackrabbit
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: jackrabbit-core
> Reporter: Padraic Hannon
> Attachments: DerbyPooledPersistenceManager.java, JCR-1050.patch
>
>
> Using datasources one should be able to rely on the application server to
> manage PreparedStatement caches therefore pre-creating and holding onto the
> connection for long periods of time should not be needed. This relates to
> improvement JCR-313, however, that change did not address the benefits one
> could see in using an application server controlled datasource. Even if
> jackrabbit does aim to use an embedded database such a system could be
> configured to use datasources and could benefit from the removal of the
> synchronization.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
