commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William Ferguson" <william_fergu...@versata.com>
Subject RE: DBCP and Exceptions
Date Tue, 22 Jan 2002 22:19:52 GMT
That would be my vote too.


William Ferguson
Technical Lead - Workflow Functionality
Versata, Inc.
"Business Logic Development and Management"
Ph     +61 03 9428 0788
Fax    +61 03 9428 0786
Email  william_ferguson@versata.com
www.versata.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Speh [mailto:rwspeh@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 23 January 2002 2:11
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: RE: DBCP and Exceptions
>
>
> I guess I put in my vote for checked Exceptions.
>
> Randy Speh
>
> --- "Waldhoff, Rodney" <rwaldhof@us.britannica.com>
> wrote:
> > From the perspective of commons-pool, it seemed like
> > in the general case the
> > need to throw Exceptions was rare, so it was better
> > to use RuntimeException
> > than force all clients to all pools to use
> > extraneous try/catch blocks. (Of
> > course in ensuring that the objects are returned to
> > the pool, we'll often
> > require a try/catch anyway, so maybe they aren't
> > extraneous.)
> >
> > Something like DBCP is a signficant case where
> > "throws Exception" would be
> > helpful.  The current impl, throwing
> > RuntimeException when ConnectionFactory
> > recieves a SQLException is really a hack.  Changing
> > pool to allow Exception
> > would be one solution, as perhaps would be throwing
> > some sort of
> > SQLExceptionWrapper (extends RuntimeException)
> > having that pass
> > transparently through the pool, and picking it up in
> > PoolingDriver/PoolingDataSource.
> >
> > Curiously, I'll note that most of the time the need
> > to throw checked
> > Exceptions is tied to the PoolableObjectFactory more
> > than to the ObjectPool
> > implementation.  I wonder if in these cases there's
> > generally an object
> > containing/wrapping the ObjectPool as well, as there
> > is in DBCP, in which
> > case the generally strategy of wrapping Exception in
> > a RuntimeException in
> > the factory, and then unwrapping it just above
> > ObjectPool may be
> > appropriate.
> >
> > If everyone else feels like pool should throw
> > checked Exceptions, I wouldn't
> > be opposed to it. Indeed, I may have talked myself
> > into it in writing this
> > email.
> >
> >  - Rod
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Randy Speh
> > To: commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> > Sent: 1/18/02 8:16 AM
> > Subject: DBCP and Exceptions
> >
> > Could someone please tell me why none of the
> > interfaces in the org.apache.commons.pool declare
> > that
> > they can throw and Exception.  When the
> > DriverConnectionFactory has an error getting a
> > connection it throws a RuntimeException.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Randy Speh
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
> > http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
> http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message