On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 10:45:01AM +1100, Stas Bekman wrote: > > Yes. I see the pooling to be modeled after Apache::DBI, but instead of > storing the whole $dbh, we will just store parts of it.
Yeap. > One more thing I was thinking about is that drivers should be able to > declare whether they support pooling and for users to be able to tell that > they want pooling. Only if the two match, then the pooling should be used. Let's return to that topic once it's working. > Also it'd be nice if the user side could be done similar to Apache::DBI so > users don't need to change their code, but just load some module on or off. Yeap. > However it'd be nicer to have a more fine tuned control, rather than just > it's on or off. Any good ideas? I was thinking along the lines of Perl > magical variables, so you can turn them on everywhere, but be able to turn > things off in some local scope. Again, we can ponder that in more depth once it's working. > Perhaps we can have the pool management implemented in a separate module, > so DBI won't have to be dependent on this kind of situations. Sure. I wasn't expecting it to be in the DBI module anyway, just like Apache::DBI isn't. Tim.
