For those scoring at home, I'm going to try managing pool-per-user
myself for the potential jmx gain and as I said, two will be amazing
success.
On 11/25/20 9:40 AM, Christopher Schultz wrote:
Phil and Rob,
On 11/24/20 11:26, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 11/24/20 8:52 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
Perhaps I read too much into the description of "The tomcat JDBC
Connection Pool" page?
TheJDBC Connection Pool|org.apache.tomcat.jdbc.pool|is a replacement
or an alternative to theApache Commons DBCP
<https://commons.apache.org/dbcp/>connection pool.
I reacted to the "replacement" bit. Are both equally sound,
supported, surviving?
Yes. I can't speak for jdbc-pool, but it looks like it is being
actively maintained.
We really need to change the language on that page. It should really
say something like "Back in the day, the Tomcat team (in retrospect)
overreacted to the limitations of DBCP and decided to build a new
high-performance pool. These days, the newer DBCP2 is great, and
jdbc-pool also exists. They are two reasonably equivalent ways to
solve the same problem. The default is DBCP and it's fine. Switching
to jdbc-pool is also fine; it does have a few minor features that you
can't (currently) get from jdbc-pool, and you will know right away if
you actually need them."
The tomcat website text has never been updated to reflect this.
Sorry about that. The current text says "Note that this does not apply
to Commons DBCP 2.x." in a few places. It's obviously very partisan
when it doesn't need to be.
-chris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
