----- Original Message ----- From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 12:16 PM Subject: Re: commons dbcp or pool problems
> On 3/6/02 2:53 PM, "John McNally" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The code in sandbox/jdbc2pool uses the commons pool and DBCP's > > PreparedStatement pool while attempting to implement the jdbc2 > > specification. Geir and anyone else at jakarta who wants to work on a > > connection pool, why not join me in finishing this? Geir, why are you > > saying you want to work on Poolman, what does it have that dbcp does > > not? > > I am saying that I think Poolman is worth saving. I rely on it in several > client projects, and I am sure there are many users of Poolman here, despite > the existence of the dbcp. > > This is not a reflection on DBCP, but rather acting on the knowledge that > Poolman has a huge user base and a long track record of reliability. I agree that Poolman is worth saving. From what I can tell from various mailing lists I am on, it has a substantial and enthusiastic following. A big part of that is because it's recognised as being reliable, good quality software. IMHO, that makes it a good candidate for Jakarta. ;-) > So far, the only feedback about this idea has been negative, so at the > moment, I am pretty convinced it isn't going to happen. That doesn't mean I > won't try elsewhere :) I would support bringing Poolman here. Although I'm far from an expert on connection pools, I'm also willing to sign up as an initial committer to help with that process. Just let me know what I can do to help. -- Martin Cooper > > > > > Yes jakarta developers should be able to work on what they want to work > > on, but the founding projects of the commons was the pool and dbcp. > > Yep - certainly was my motivation. > > > Yes > > it is possible to have multiple implementations of these. > > Yep. > > [SNIP] > > Isn't the point of the > > commons to not have multiple implementations of the same concept? > > Not necessarily... > > > > > "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote: > >> > >> On 3/6/02 6:32 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> The only point to anything at Jakarta is that the volunteers will work > >>> on what they ~want~ to work on. If there are volunteers here who want to > >>> work on the dbcp, then we will continue to have a dbcp. If there are > >>> volunteers here who want to bring Poolman here, then they could do that > >>> too. > >>> > >>> My only point is that the opportunity now exists; it's just a matter of > >>> whether anyone interested in working on connection pools is interested > >>> in pursuing the Poolman codebase. > >> > >> I've talked to Sean every now and then about bringing Poolman here to > >> Jakarta, and I have another query on this in to him now. > >> > >> I'm going to try and do it. > >> > >> geir > >> > >> -- > >> Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> System and Software Consulting > >> The bytecodes are language independent. - Sam Ruby > >> > >> -- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- > Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > System and Software Consulting > POC lives! > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
