On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 11:38, Oki DZ wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Charles Benett wrote:
> > BTW, what are you working on?
>
> MySQLMailRepository, MySQLSpoolRepository, and UsersMySQLRepository that
> implement Turbine's db connection pooling. The spool repository implements
> a global cache that temporarily stores the list of the messages that
> resides in the spool; so that when the spool repository's accept() method
> gets invoked (after the first invocation), there would be no additional
> SQL query sent to the db server. This would make the spool works faster I
> believe, even if the db pooling is already there.
I don't think that db-specific subclasses is the right design for handling
different databases. I reckon that database-specific implementations would be
better built using a containment relationship with a database-specific
"plugin" (ie bridge pattern). Even better if we can stick to using meta-data
(ie config) for all database-specific needs. The use of inheritance in this
case is not the best design, in my opinion.
(I'm assuming that the classes named above follow on from a previous email
which described the design in more detail)
Daz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
