On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Yoav Shapira wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I hear both of your concerns, and I will withdraw the proposal, thanks
>>> for speaking
I would go one step further and not ship jdbc-related components in the
basic distro :-),
and bundle dbcp and jdbc-related code as a separate module.
If someone is using a database - there are few setup steps anyways, and
downloading
a separate tomcat module may be the easiest of them.
From a tom
Markus Schönhaber wrote:
Mark Thomas:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
2. Remy's comment -"Tomcat does not do connection pools"
We sure do, the fact that we ship with one, means we do connection
pools. and we are in the job of refactoring commons-dbcp, and now you
can't even compile
Mark Thomas wrote:
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
Remy and Yoav, I totally understand where you are coming from, and I
have thought about it for while before I suggested adding it here
1. commons-dbcp is very stagnant, they are not even accepting
performance improvement patches
https://issue
Mark Thomas:
> Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>> 2. Remy's comment -"Tomcat does not do connection pools"
>> We sure do, the fact that we ship with one, means we do connection
>> pools. and we are in the job of refactoring commons-dbcp, and now you
>> can't even compile Tomcat with JDK 1.6, nor ru
Tim Funk wrote:
Oddly enough - I started reading the code today. There are some minor
tweaks without digging too deep into the code:
ProxyConnection.java
This should be CLOSE_VAL.equals(method.getName())
if (CLOSE_VAL==method.getName()) { .
aren't method names in the constant pool?
PoolProp
Yoav Shapira wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hear both of your concerns, and I will withdraw the proposal, thanks for
speaking up
These are all good comments. Is it possible to package up in a way
that core Tomcat does not
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> Remy and Yoav, I totally understand where you are coming from, and I
> have thought about it for while before I suggested adding it here
>
> 1. commons-dbcp is very stagnant, they are not even accepting
> performance improvement patches
> https://issues.apache.org/
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Remy and Yoav, I totally understand where you are coming from, and I have
> thought about it for while before I suggested adding it here
> 4. Going with the little piece of code (8classes) elsewhere is a bit moot
Oddly enough - I started reading the code today. There are some minor
tweaks without digging too deep into the code:
ProxyConnection.java
This should be CLOSE_VAL.equals(method.getName())
if (CLOSE_VAL==method.getName()) {
PoolProperties
protected String name = "Filip Connection Pool["+(poolCou
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 09:15 -0600, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> Remy and Yoav, I totally understand where you are coming from, and I
> have thought about it for while before I suggested adding it here
>
> 1. commons-dbcp is very stagnant, they are not even accepting
> performance improvement
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hear both of your concerns, and I will withdraw the proposal, thanks for
> speaking up
These are all good comments. Is it possible to package up in a way
that core Tomcat does not depend on it, like Costin s
Remy and Yoav, I totally understand where you are coming from, and I
have thought about it for while before I suggested adding it here
1. commons-dbcp is very stagnant, they are not even accepting
performance improvement patches
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-75
2. Remy's comment
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 10:19 -0400, Yoav Shapira wrote:
> However, I don't think we should stick a connection pool
> implementation in Tomcat proper. It should go in Commons DbUtils, or
> DBCP, or another existing project. Heck, it can even start out on
> Google Code, idealy with an ASL license.
>
> My primary concern is to have the dependency right - the new module can
> depend on tomcat,
> but tomcat should not have any direct dep. on the new code. I wouldn't mind
> if all the existing JDBC
> related components would move to the new module as well :-).
Costin is a long time supporter of m
I think there is a solution that would make everyone happy :-) - put this
code and
everything that depends on it in a separate module ( separate == different
release cycle and binary ). I don't know if it should be in a separate svn
tree, probably
would be better.
Then you can cut a release - and
Filip,
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> if there are no objections, I'll start integrating this into trunk tonight or
> tomorrow,
I've read the bug in Bugzilla and looked at the code. I understand
why you want a new connection pool implement
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 08:09 -0600, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
> if there are no objections, I'll start integrating this into trunk
> tonight or tomorrow,
-1.
Tomcat does not do connection pools. Commons-pool/-dbcp is used instead,
so you should contribute your code to the right project, I th
if there are no objections, I'll start integrating this into trunk
tonight or tomorrow,
Filip
Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
gentlemen,
having run into issues with performance around commons-dbcp as number
of logical cpus increase, no such method exceptions using newer JDKs,
I've made a sma
19 matches
Mail list logo
