on 11/29/2000 10:12 AM, "Michaud, Ben A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, actually, I posed the question rhetorically.
> We need to provide a mechanism to pool database
> connections, because it does not make sense that
> the database provide this mechanism.
Actually it makes perfect sense that it doesn't.
Hello? Why would it pool connections to itself? The overhead is in creating
the socket connection and establishing the communication (ie: login and
authentication), so given that the database is probably on another server,
what benefit would it be to have the database cache socket connections to
itself?
Regardless, the fact of the matter is that Turbine provides a
java.sql.Connection pooling mechanism that is compatible with ANY JDBC
Driver. So, I really don't understand what the heck you are getting at.
> Similarly,
> then, it should not make sense for Forte to
> provide socket connect pooling for an entirely
> separate system on, probably, a different box,
> when that system has an entirely independent
> API and memory space.
Maybe. Maybe not. MySQL and Oracle doesn't provide a connection pooling
system. You are supposed to implement that on top of the JDBC driver.
> Am I still confused?
Yes.
-jon
--
twice of not very much is still a lot more than not very much
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
