commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Graham <>
Subject RE: DBCP status?
Date Sat, 28 Jun 2003 18:41:50 GMT
--- "Noel J. Bergman" <> wrote:
> > > - Better support/debugging for forcing connections closed after
> being
> > >   open for "too long"
> > This is exactly what got DBCP into trouble in the past.  I'm -1 on
> > providing any ability in DBCP to close lost connections.  DBCP should
> > provide the ability to *log* when it detects a resource leak but the
> > application is responsible for the health of the pool.
> I understand your view, but do you believe that there is no possible
> solution?  If it is just an implementation concern, I'd just as soon see
> what solution someone comes up with.  In your opinion, what are/were the
> problems in handling "abandoned" connections in DBCP?

The problem was that DBCP was trying to track and recover abandoned
connections.  This isn't just an implementation problem, it's a philosophy
problem.  Pool semantics dictate that client applications behave properly
when checking out and returning pool resources.  The pool is absolutely
not responsible for fixing poorly behaving applications.  This led to
bugs, questions, convoluted inheritance hierachies/code, and promoted the
idea that users didn't have to bother writing their applications properly
because the pool would fix their apps for them.

The pool should keep track of how long a connection has been checked out
and log a message when it passes some configurable threshold but it should
never try to grab the connection back from the application.


> 	--- Noel
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message