Oh, I see now.
Sorry, probably my brain is still in weekend this morning.

Well then, relying only on Tomcat DBCP seems correct to me


--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:13 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> 2015-08-03 17:09 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <[email protected]>:
>
> > I don't have a strong opinion.
> > Well shading does not make it a real different impl, does it?
> >
> >
> No that is the point, in tomee we'll get twice the same code then.
>
>
> > Previously they had a real fork of DBCP but I thought they finally
> aligned
> > it.
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > yes
> > >
> > > tomcat-jdbc is another pool impl than dbcp2. tomcat shades dbcp2 at
> build
> > > time but also provides jdbc impl.
> > >
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> > >
> > > 2015-08-03 17:00 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> [email protected]
> > >:
> > >
> > > > Hard to say for may.
> > > > My understanding is that DBCP 2 and Tomcat JDBC finally merged
> together
> > > and
> > > > Tomcat is now using DBCP2.
> > > >
> > > > Am I wrong?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > For tracking: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-1620
> > > > >
> > > > > migrating to tomcat ones would be as easy as a sed then
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > > > > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > 2015-08-02 20:12 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <
> [email protected]
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Now build is green next question : do we replace dbcp by version
> > 2? I
> > > > am
> > > > > > almost tempted to not use dbcp but the shade of tomcat even in
> > > openejb
> > > > > just
> > > > > > to avoid the double dep in tomcat. Wdyt?
> > > > > > Le 31 juil. 2015 17:11, "Romain Manni-Bucau" <
> > [email protected]>
> > > a
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> pushed a first version linked to this jira:
> > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-1617
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Only connection has defaults but no more the pooling itself
> (size,
> > > > > >> eviction etc).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
> > > > > >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
> > > > > >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
> > > > > >> <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 2015-07-27 19:16 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > >> :
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Big +1 in simplifying the pool configuration.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> JLouis
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > >>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > >>> http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> > > > > >>> [email protected]>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> > Hi guys,
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > in tomee we support the ability to change the db/connection
> > pool
> > > > > easily
> > > > > >>> > but IMO we have one issue with defaults. This is done thanks
> to
> > > > > >>> > "DataSourceCreator".
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > When impl-ed it I tried to normalize some part of the config
> > > cause
> > > > it
> > > > > >>> was
> > > > > >>> > in between minors but now well get the version 7 I think we
> can
> > > > > change
> > > > > >>> it a
> > > > > >>> > bit and I d like to use the custom config for each pool
> > > > > >>> > and get rid of the implicit conversion.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > User issue: dbcp will use JdbcUrl where tomcat-jdbc will use
> > Url
> > > -
> > > > > but
> > > > > >>> it
> > > > > >>> > would get reported in logs if the user didnt use the right
> one.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > Gain: no implicit value lost/misconfigured as today (today
> with
> > > our
> > > > > >>> > conversion logic some setters are ignored cause values are
> > > > rewritten
> > > > > >>> before
> > > > > >>> > the instantiation and we dont see it at all, common issue:
> > > > validation
> > > > > >>> is
> > > > > >>> > skipped).
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > So here is the question: do we remove all the pool config
> from
> > > > > >>> > service-jar.xml + conversion from DataSourceCreators  and
> only
> > > keep
> > > > > the
> > > > > >>> > connection (default datasource) and JTA (managed by default)
> > > > entries
> > > > > as
> > > > > >>> > provided defaults.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > Constraint to stay nice: still support Duration setter
> (instead
> > > of
> > > > > >>> 60000
> > > > > >>> > for 1mn we can set as property value "1 minute").
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > +1 from me
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > PS: if no big -1 next week (monday = 08/27) I'll do the
> change
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > >>> > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> > > > > >>> > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> > > > > >>> > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> > > > > >>> > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
> > Tomitriber
> > > > > >>> > <http://www.tomitribe.com>
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to