[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12927849#action_12927849
]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-2803:
------------------------------------
> what's the configuration diff between those two?
IIRC there are no configuration parameters in the non-pooled PMs that don't
exist in the pooled counterparts. In case there are (need to check that), it
should be easy to implement them also in the pooled versions.
> Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB persistence managers
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-2803
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803
> Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: config, jackrabbit-core
> Reporter: Jukka Zitting
> Fix For: 2.2.0
>
>
> In JCR-1456 and Jackrabbit 2.0 we introduced database connection pooling, but
> decided to keep the existing database bundle persistence managers intact to
> avoid potential regressions. We haven't seen such problems even though pooled
> bundle persistence has been the default since the 2.0 release, so I think it
> would be safe to deprecate all the non-pooled bundle DB PMs.
> And in order to remove duplicate code (that has already complicated some
> changes within o.a.j.persistence), I'd also take the extra step of making
> the o.a.j.p.bundle.* classes extend respective the o.a.j.p.pool.* classes.
> This would automatically allow also old non-pooled configurations to benefit
> from connection pooling.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
