[jira] Commented: (POOL-177) GenericKeyedObjectPoolFactory and GenericObjectPoolFactory to share a common superclass

["Simone Tripodi (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-177?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12965682#action_12965682 ] 

Simone Tripodi commented on POOL-177:
-------------------------------------

I'd generally agree on applying this patch, but I join people saying that storing the config instance inside pools - and setting/getting values to/from it - could be malicious; my reason is, since config could be shared, immagine the same configuration instance will be used to create 2 different pools, and at runtime one of these pools configuration will be modified... the other one will start working in an undesired way :(

I can apply the patch and modify it according to this generally approved thought, otherwise if you have some spare time you can commit directly and you or I can adapt the code. Does it work for you?

> GenericKeyedObjectPoolFactory and GenericObjectPoolFactory to share a common superclass
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: POOL-177
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/POOL-177
>             Project: Commons Pool
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: Nightly Builds
>            Reporter: Gary Gregory
>             Fix For: 2.0
>
>         Attachments: POOL-177.diff, POOL-177.diff
>
>
> I see now in trunk that GenericKeyedObjectPoolConfig extends GenericObjectPoolConfig, which I like.
> It seems that the next step would be for GenericKeyedObjectPoolFactory and GenericObjectPoolFactory to share a common superclass.
> To see what I mean, look at the patch in this ticket.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.