Barry Lind wrote:
> I don't think this patch is a good idea because:
> a) its only purpose is to supress warning messages in the server log
> when the client isn't coded properly (i.e. the client application should
> be closing connections gracefully/explicitly before calling exit()).

For some people (like me) it isn't that simple to close the connection
objects because of the asyncronous nature of their applications.
> b) The costs of this patch are great IMHO:
>    1) increased complexity by having a JDK1.3 specific build

We could just catch the NoSuchMethodError so when it is run on a jdk <
1.3 there will be no problem.

>    2) increased support costs (why I am getting error XXX when I run
> under JRUN?) (I have already seen more emails to the list about having
> problems with this feature than I have ever saw about the warning
> messages it supresses).

Could be solved by documentation.

>    3) Increased complexity for users needing to run under JRUN (and
> possibly other JSEE servers) because it requires editing the security
> manager settings to allow the JDBC driver to do this privileged operation.

I posted the code for the policy file before.  If people use that there
won't be any problems.
Even better if the distributed jar files were signed we could have
policy file entries that would just grant the permission for code that
was signed by postgres.

Joseph Shraibman
Increase signal to noise ratio.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to