On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 05:09:10PM -0800, Jon Stevens wrote:
> > way of doing it. Having said that its not strictly necessary because the
> > old ways will still work...
>
> It is necessary to explain to people why we have two ways to do the same
> thing.
True. In fact you've pretty much convinced me there's not a whole lot of
point. I am interested in having the pool make use of all the features
of a JDBC2 compliant driver on the back end (like surviving DB restarts
well etc).
However I don't really care personally about the exposed API, because as
you point out Torque means I never have to use it :-)
So when I get a chance later this week I'll assess Costas's patches from
this perspective.
--
Sean Legassick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a person, nothing human can be alien to me
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
