Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Development" <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:33:48 -0700
From: Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-478) Function to force closing connection
 (and session)
In-reply-to: <42E9143C.7090300@debrunners.com>
To: Derby Development <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Message-id: <42E916FC.4000407@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
References: <1999324040.1122563182740.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org>
 <42E908EE.5050000@sun.com> <42E91364.9030205@sun.com>
 <42E9143C.7090300@debrunners.com>

I agree with Dan.

PooledConnection exposes a getConnection() method which returns its wrapped
Connection object. I suspect the intention is that that Connection is 
itself a wrapper whose close()
method deliberately does not close the underlying physical Connection. 
Being able to
close the underlying Connection would work at cross-purposes to the 
whole idea
of Connection pooling.

It would be interesting to understand the problem that this enhancement 
is wrestling with.
Nakayama-san, can you shed some more light on your reasons for logging 
this bug?

Thanks,
-Rick

Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

>Rick Hillegas wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi David,
>>
>>Where in the JDBC 4 spec would this be? I seem to have missed it.
>>There's a fairly long  section on Connection Pooling, but I didn't see
>>this issue addressed.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm not sure it should be. Applications should not have the ability to
>close the underlying physical connection from their logical connection
>object. An api exists to close the physical connection, the close method
>on PooledConnection. But applications do not (and should not) have
>access to PooledConnection.
>
>Dan.
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>>Thanks,
>>-Rick
>>
>>David Van Couvering wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Isn't this part of the proposed interfaces for the JDBC 4 spec?
>>>
>>>Tomohito Nakayama (JIRA) wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-478?page=all ]
>>>>
>>>>Tomohito Nakayama updated DERBY-478:
>>>>------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>       Summary: Function to force closing connection (and session) 
>>>>(was: Force to close connection and session)
>>>>   Description: When connection exists in ConnectionPool , there are
>>>>no way to ensure closing connection inside the ConnectionPool from
>>>>application program just using jdbc interface.
>>>>
>>>>I think there exists needs to force closing connection when it is
>>>>needed to ensure closing of connection.  was:When connection exists
>>>>in ConnectionPool , there are no way to ensure
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>Function to force closing connection (and session)
>>>>>--------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>        Key: DERBY-478
>>>>>        URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-478
>>>>>    Project: Derby
>>>>>       Type: Improvement
>>>>> Components: Network Server
>>>>>   Reporter: Tomohito Nakayama
>>>>>  
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>When connection exists in ConnectionPool , there are no way to
>>>>>ensure closing connection inside the ConnectionPool from application
>>>>>program just using jdbc interface.
>>>>>I think there exists needs to force closing connection when it is
>>>>>needed to ensure closing of connection.    
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>