Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 17222 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2002 23:50:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Aug 2002 23:50:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 5451 invoked by uid 97); 29 Aug 2002 23:51:26 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 5440 invoked by uid 97); 29 Aug 2002 23:51:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 1807 invoked by uid 98); 29 Aug 2002 23:49:05 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:48:24 +1000 (EST) From: Matthew Firth X-X-Sender: matthew@border.matera.net.au To: commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org cc: iarias@yahoo.com Subject: re: [DBCP] NamedDataSourceFactory to share DataSources between Servlet Contexts Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: Content-Disposition: INLINE X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N looks neat - now all you need is for Glenn Nielsen to commit it for you! matthew >>> Isaac Arias 23/08/02 9:16:22 >>> Hi Matthew, Thanks for your feedback. I agree with you 100%. It makes more sense to use inheritance. I have made the changes you proposed (except that I'm recycling the dataSource variable) and compiled it. I tested it in one of our development servers and it seems to work fine (no reason why it shouldn't :). I'm attaching the new file. Let me know if you think about other ways of making this work. The in Tomcat 4.1 should make this superfluous but until then... Thanks again, Ike _________________________________ Isaac Arias - CTO Tokenzone, Inc. --- Matthew Firth wrote: > Isaac, > > My thought would be that an extension of > BasicDataSourceFactory is > better than creating a paralell implementation. If > new resource > parameters are supported by BasicDataSource & > BasicDataSourceFactory (I > have a list of them I plan to add sometime....) then > this will work > transparantly - i.e. without having to place > identical changes into two > separate classes. > > I would have implemented it as below. No idea if > this code even compiles, > let alone functions properly (and will probably be > mangled by MTAs > everywhere). My apologies if there something > obvious here that I have > overlooked & grossly simplified! > > > matthew > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: