[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16302965#comment-16302965
]
Craig L Russell commented on JDO-771:
-------------------------------------
The application still needs to give JDBC enough information to be able to find
a suitable driver. According to
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/sql/DriverManager.html, "As part
of its initialization, the DriverManager class will attempt to load the driver
classes referenced in the "jdbc.drivers" system property."
So simply removing the ConnectionDriverName will probably make the application
fail unless the system property is set instead.
I would be open to updating the JDO documentation to indicate that there are
several ways to get the appropriate JDBC driver loaded.
> Update requirement of ConnectionDriverName since JDBC 4 changed requirements
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JDO-771
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-771
> Project: JDO
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: specification, tck
> Reporter: Andy Jefferson
> Priority: Minor
>
> JDBC 4.0 changed the requirement for specifying a JDBC driver name.
> Previously an application had to load the class to register the driver by use
> of Class.forName.
> All JDBC 4.0+ drivers should register themselves. See
> https://community.oracle.com/docs/DOC-983612
> This likely means that a JDO provider will not require the
> javax.jdo.option.ConnectionDriverName to be supplied.
> DataNucleus (v5.1.5+) certainly doesn't require it, and only previously used
> it for loading the driver as per previous JDBC semantics.
> This is only referred to in section 11.1 and Appendix G of the spec that I
> can see. Perhaps we can omit it in JDO 3.2+, particularly as the JRE in use
> will require JDBC v4+?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
