On 22 August 2012 21:43, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.moua...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:21 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 22 August 2012 17:52, Milamber <milam...@apache.org> wrote: >> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Philippe Mouawad < >> > philippe.moua...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip/> >> >> I think we should really remove dependency on Apache Excalibur. >> >> We still use parts of Excalibur for JDBC pooling. >> >> I don't see the point of pooling if you are testing JDBC; it then >> becomes as much a test of the pool rather than JDBC. >> > Don't understand this JMeter threads are intended to represent independent users, so sharing JDBC connections between different threads is equivalent to sharing between different users. Does not make sense to me. But assumijng that there is a use case for sharing a pool between threads: If a JDBC performance test shows problems - is it the JDBC database, or the pooling implementation? What if the pooling implementation is different from the one in the application one is simulating? >> >> If we do want to support pooling, it should be selectable. >> However I don't know if there is a standard Pooling API, so that might >> not be possible. >> >> Why not use commons-dbcp or tomcat-pool for this ? They are just specific examples of pools; no different really from sticking with Excalibur. If we truly want to allow users to test pooling, they should be able to use any pool they wish, so they can see which one meets their needs best. But I suspect this will be quite tricky to allow arbitrary pooling implementations.
