> > Subject: Re: Connection pool (and more) > From: "Jon Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 10:14:16 -0800 > > on 12/27/2000 9:44 AM, "Bob Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm not familiar with the details of your DB connection pool, but I just > > thought I'd offer this consideration: In our custom framework, we decided that > > our db connections should NOT extend > > java.sql.connection, because we didn't want anyone to close a connection. We > > decided that the connection pool should be the only thing responsible for > > closing connections. Individual applications > > should simply request connections from the pool, and return them to the pool. > > If someone wants to go off on their own and do their own special thing, JDBC > > is always available, but we wanted to > > keep our pool clean. ;) > > Food for thought. > > > > Bob > > Question: > > Why didn't you just use Turbine's pool? :-) > > -jon > > -- > Honk if you love peace and quiet. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Good question. Simple answer: We developed ours before we discovered Turbine, and we've been pretty happy with it. Bob ------------------------------------------------------------ To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/> Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
