db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremy Boynes <jboy...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Unified DataSource API
Date Wed, 11 May 2005 21:53:46 GMT
Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> I think that building a unified DataSource API will actually not help
> very much because the problem is that there is no standard interface for a
> DataSource anyway. 

However, there is a common configuration model, that of a JavaBean. This 
is easy to map to a GUI for configuration, and easy to map to XML for 
configuration files (e.g. the way a ManagedConnectionFactory is configured).

> Even if Derby had a unified API, you still have to deal
> with
> differences in other DBMS implementations. So, in the end, the fact that
> Derby has different DataSource implementations is not disimilar to the
> situation where one has to deal with differences between the various
> DBMS vendors.

But all implementations follow the JavaBean model so it is fairly easy 
to write an application that can generically handle any vendor's 

The advantage of a unified model is that there is only one 
implementation *within Derby.* Having multiple ones for one product 
depending on the JVM and transport in use is just confusing.

> I have myself found it frustrating that there isn't a standard API
> for DataSources. It seems that the designers assumed you would always
> use JNDI, and did not really cater for J2SE or non-J2EE requirements.

That was the assumption. Although it may not be ideal, I still think it 
is easier than the original DriverManager solution.


View raw message