I also agree that the type 4 driver only a simple JDBC 2.0 driver is much
much practical.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Massimo Ferrari" <massimo@...>
To: <IB-Java@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: [IB-Java] Build on Windows


> > Thanks!!
> Well, it wasn't a difficult job for me! :)
>
> > I was trying to give instructions yesterday on this list on how a jboss
> > ConnectionManager could be used standalone pooling. I have some
problems
> > with the current state of the jboss ConnectionManagers, however they
> should
> > work fine for anything but very high load situations. I'm hoping to
find
> > time to rewrite them, but it is not at the top of my list.
> >
> > (problems are: (1)if the pool is all checked out with requests blocking,
> > blocking requests can wait forever, as returned connections can get
handed
> > out to new requests. (2) the pooling code is too complicated and has too
> > much speculative functionality and too many parameters for the purpose
of
> a
> > connection pool. It may be great for something else, but it is too hard
> to
> > fix problems (see 1) with its current complexity)
> Ok, but first just a question: what do you think about tyrex? It should be
> not that difficult to implement pooling (DataSource pool) for the firebird
> driver using the tyrex library, or am I completely wrong? They say they
use
> also a connector architecture, but I'm not sure it's the JCA.
>
> Well, I see that using the Minerva Pool has its advatanges, since (I
guess)
> you are the main developer, but I have first to understand the mechanics
of
> jca.
> Least but not last, I partially agree with Kyle Cordes: I think your type
4
> driver would also be really useful as just a simple JDBC 2.0 driver.
>
> Massimo
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> IB-Java-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>