Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 09A729B6F for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:45:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 406 invoked by uid 500); 14 Dec 2011 21:45:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 277 invoked by uid 500); 14 Dec 2011 21:45:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 233 invoked by uid 99); 14 Dec 2011 21:45:10 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:45:10 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [80.12.242.42] (HELO smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) (80.12.242.42) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:45:01 +0000 Received: from mail.homeinbox.net ([2.24.224.249]) by mwinf5d20 with ME id 99kf1i0065PUPca039kgTC; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 22:44:40 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A445B22002 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:39:05 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at homeinbox.net Received: from mail.homeinbox.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.homeinbox.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1BVZ-4i9w6ee for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:39:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.178.38.181] (unknown [213.205.225.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C91AB22001; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:38:58 +0000 (GMT) References: User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [POOL2] mutability requirements for Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool in DBCP/JNDI From: markt@apache.org Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:18:21 +0000 To: Commons Developers List ,Commons Developers List Message-ID: <716482f2-ff72-41b4-8579-d909ce69d9fd@email.android.com> sebb wrote: >This is a parallel thread to the one about PoolFactory implementations. > >I'm trying to establish the mutability needs of the >[Keyed]ObjectPool implementations, i.e. > >Generic[Keyed]ObjectPool > >I've looked at DBCP 1.4, which uses POOL 1.x. > >SharedPoolDataSource.registerPool() creates an instance of >GenericKeyedObjectPool which it configures via the setters; however >the instance is then stored in a KeyedObjectPool, and setters/getters >are not used elsewwhere. > >SImilarly, DriverAdapterCPDS.getPooledConnection creates an instance >of GenericKeyedObjectPool which is then only used via the >KeyedObjectPool interface. > >So: as far as I can tell from DBCP, there is no need to provide >mutable ObjectPool implementations; so long as the pool can be >configured intially, that is sufficient. > >Are there any other existing use cases that I am missing here? > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org Yes, There is a requirement to modify the pool configuration via jmx while the pool is in use. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org