commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DBCP] The plan for v2
Date Tue, 22 Mar 2011 17:58:59 GMT
Hi Mark and all:

It's good to hear someone is thinking about moving forward!

pool2 trunk seems to me to be highly volatile based on having worked some in
pool2.

I've read opinions here going back and forth as to how to solidify the API
or even go /back/ to the pool1 style before moving forward again.

I think time would be better spent solidifying pool2. Time spent matching
dbcp2 to pool2 could be a waste because, to me, pool2 feels like a moving
target ATM.

Min Java 5: +1!

Gary

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:

> Don't let the title get your hopes up. I don't have one yet, at least
> not a complete one.
> One of the primary driver for pool2 was to make use of
> java.util.concurrent for the pool implementation and significantly
> improve DBCP performance on multi-core systems (re-using ideas where we
> can from Tomcat's jdbc-pool). I'm at the point where I have some time to
> work on this.
>
> My very outline plan was as follows:
> a) get DBCP working with pool2
> b) run the jdbc-pool performance tests to see how much ground we need to
> catch up
> c) improve the pool2 implementation until we get somewhere close to
> jdbc-pool
>
> a) is non-trival and is really the focus of this e-mail.
>
> Issue 1
> =======
> DBCP isn't going to be able to use pool2 without some major re-factoring.
>
> My solution is:
> - copy current dbcp trunk to a branch
> - rename o.a.commons.dbcp to o.a.commons.dbcp2
> - update dependencies from pool to pool2
> - get it working
>
> Issue 2
> =======
> DBCP also ships with the o.a.commons.jocl package.
>
> There have been no jocl related questions on the users list since 2007.
> To prevent clashes between dbcp1 and dbcp2 I propose to simply drop JOCL
> support in dbcp2.
>
> Issue 3
> =======
> Minimum Java version.
>
> Supporting multiple JDBC API versions is a nuisance. I propose switching
> to a jdbc-pool style proxy approach. I also propose a minimum Java
> version of 5 to align with pool2.
>
> Issue 4
> =======
> Will the new dbcp work with Servlet containers?
>
> There were some concerns in this area with the pool2 re-factoring. This
> needs to be tested but my turn out to be a non-issue.
>
>
> I think these 4 issues need to be resolved before there is a pool2 or
> dbcp2 release.
>
>
> Assuming there are no objections, I plan to start committing along these
> lines in the next couple of days.
>
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Thank you,
Gary

http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
http://garygregory.com/
http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/
http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message