commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anton Tagunov <atagu...@mail.cnt.ru>
Subject Re[2]: [dbcp] Do we need Referenceable?
Date Wed, 09 Jul 2003 05:53:29 GMT
Hello John!

JM> I am confused (and it has been awhile since I last looked at what is
JM> required).  A DataSource should implement at least one of Referencable
JM> and Serializable; the specification recommends both.  Are you advocating
JM> that we implement neither?

Yes. But probably I really do not understand something essential.
Disclaimer: yet have not read all JNDI spec though.

Okay, imagine we have a separate Factory and Product.
Factory is ObjectFactory, it creates Product.

You say it is recommended that Product implements Referenceable
or Serializable. But how can this be utilized?

I believe there is only one way for it:
if we have an object of type Product

    Product product;

and we have a writeable object of class javax.naming.Context

    Context context;

then we may call

    context.bind( ..., product );

and instead of storing the product itself the context will
store either a reference to it, obtained via

    product.getReference();

or product's serialized form.

With Tomcat we're in a different position.
Tomcat takes ResourceParams and unconditionally creates
a Reference object all by itself populating it with
the config data. This Reference also contains
the factory class we have configured.

But what use for our product to implement Referenceable then?
It will never have Context.bind() called on it.

So I'm for implementing neither Referenceable nor Serializable.
In fact BasicDataSourceFactory/BasicDataSource implement none
of this and work find with Tomcat.

AT> As I understand Tomcat JNDI resource infrastructure, it is enough
AT> to have an object that implements javax.naming.spi.ObjectFactory

JM> Are you saying that we can assume that if we meet tomcat's requirements
JM> for binding to its jndi implementation, that we will meet the
JM> requirements for a generic jndi implementation?  Or that we should only
JM> worry about tomcat's version?

Let's face it. Tomcat makes such a specialized use of the Reference
object that our factories this way or other fit only into Tomcat.

-Anton


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


Mime
View raw message