Hi Pam,

I was thinking exactly along the same lines here especiaally since JE's DatabaseException does not extend IOException.  BTW this is funny but note that I already refactored from NamingException to IOException but just now felt I was doing something stupid. 

Thanks for your comments,
Alex

On Jan 16, 2008 3:20 AM, Pierre-Arnaud Marcelot <pa@marcelot.net> wrote:
Hi Alex,

Option 1 seems the easiest solution but will it work with an exception based on DatabaseException ?
I don't think... Reading the JE API, DatabaseException extends Exception and not IOException.

I like Option 3 and the idea to encapsulate the exception thrown inside our "own exception". But it means surely a lot of refactoring...

My 2 cents. ;)

Pierre-Arnaud


On Jan 15, 2008 11:45 PM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
Hi all,

Different underlying stores have different kinds of checked exceptions they throw at the lowest level.  For example JDBM is humble and just uses IO exceptions.  The JE authors use an exception hierarchy based on DatabaseException.  I was wondering if there was a preference out the base class for what exceptions are thrown from partitions?  Right now there are a few options:

(1) Throw exceptions that extend IOException (works well with JDBM)
(2) Throw NamingExceptions works well with Java Naming but we have a bad taste in our mouths from this.
(3) Create our own base class for exceptions thrown at these lower layers like say PartitionException

Right now I went with IOException but I'm thinking it might be biased towards a particular partition implementation.  Does anyone have some opinion one way or the other?

Alex