On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Quinton McCombs wrote:

> From reading the docs on PoolableObjectFactory, it appears that if an
> object is going to be destroyed, there is no reason to call
> passivateObject() first.  Is this correct?
>

Correct.  The idea is that passivateObject(x) prepares 'x' to be stored
within the pool.  If your intention is to destroy an object, there is no
need to passivate it first.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to