[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16304461#comment-16304461
]
Andy Jefferson commented on JDO-771:
------------------------------------
The aforementioned system property is not set by 99.9% of "applications", and
the service loader is where the drivers should be found from. That (property)
would (only) be useful to explicitly define which precise one when multiple
exist for the specified connection URL, and I've never come across such a
situation, ever.
Either way, DataNucleus has never ever used the connectionDriverName for
anything more than JDBC "Class.forName", which is now redundant in this
context, so this issue is simply pointing out that the property is redundant
for all current DataNucleus (and JDO?) usage.
> 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)
