The pooling in jboss (3) and the firebird jca driver is very similar, it is
based on the same code (I added it to the firebird driver when I rewrote
the jboss pooling code). It fits in better with the internal structure of
the firebird driver than the tomcat pooling will, but is unlikely to make a
significant performance difference. I don't know how modular Tomcat is,
but it's possible using the built in pooling would let you remove Tyrex (if
they are really using it) which is not small.


david jencks

On 2002.07.16 15:57:43 -0400 William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-16 at 12:51, rrokytskyy wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Now which is a better way to go, Tomcat pooling, or the drivers own
> > > internal pool.
> > >
> > > I most use pools in web apps, that will run under Tomcat.
> >
> > I would say that you use Tomcat pooling. It would be much more easier
> > to switch from Firebird to Oracle later, for example.
>
> Thanks for your input, but I just moved to Firebird from InterBase, and
> as long as the Firebird developers continue to produce the quality I
> know they can produce. I will be sticking with Firebird until I die. :)
>
> Well maybe not that long but I have not plans in the next many years to
> switch.
>
> So it comes down to what will perform better. Tomcat or the Firebird
> JDBC driver pooling?
>
> Or as I am not using it now, but may later, JBoss, if it has a pooling
> feature. I am very ignorant on what JBoss is and can do, but am looking
> into it. As it seems to be the sh@#.
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> William L. Thomson Jr.
> Support Group
> Obsidian-Studios Inc.
> 439 Amber Way
> Petaluma, Ca. 94952
> Phone 707.766.9509
> Fax 707.766.8989
> http://www.obsidian-studios.com
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Firebird-Java-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>