You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by "Jukka Zitting (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2010/11/03 14:05:23 UTC
[jira] Created: (JCR-2803) Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB
persistence managers
Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB persistence managers
---------------------------------------------------
Key: JCR-2803
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803
Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: config, jackrabbit-core
Reporter: Jukka Zitting
Fix For: 2.2.0
In JCR-1456 and Jackrabbit 2.0 we introduced database connection pooling, but decided to keep the existing database bundle persistence managers intact to avoid potential regressions. We haven't seen such problems even though pooled bundle persistence has been the default since the 2.0 release, so I think it would be safe to deprecate all the non-pooled bundle DB PMs.
And in order to remove duplicate code (that has already complicated some changes within o.a.j.persistence), I'd also take the extra step of making the o.a.j.p.bundle.* classes extend respective the o.a.j.p.pool.* classes. This would automatically allow also old non-pooled configurations to benefit from connection pooling.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (JCR-2803) Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB
persistence managers
Posted by "Marcel Reutegger (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12927842#action_12927842 ]
Marcel Reutegger commented on JCR-2803:
---------------------------------------
> old non-pooled configurations to benefit from connection pooling
what's the configuration diff between those two? or more specifically, are there configuration parameters that only apply to non-pooled PMs?
> Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB persistence managers
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-2803
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803
> Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: config, jackrabbit-core
> Reporter: Jukka Zitting
> Fix For: 2.2.0
>
>
> In JCR-1456 and Jackrabbit 2.0 we introduced database connection pooling, but decided to keep the existing database bundle persistence managers intact to avoid potential regressions. We haven't seen such problems even though pooled bundle persistence has been the default since the 2.0 release, so I think it would be safe to deprecate all the non-pooled bundle DB PMs.
> And in order to remove duplicate code (that has already complicated some changes within o.a.j.persistence), I'd also take the extra step of making the o.a.j.p.bundle.* classes extend respective the o.a.j.p.pool.* classes. This would automatically allow also old non-pooled configurations to benefit from connection pooling.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Commented: (JCR-2803) Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB
persistence managers
Posted by "Jukka Zitting (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12927849#action_12927849 ]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCR-2803:
------------------------------------
> what's the configuration diff between those two?
IIRC there are no configuration parameters in the non-pooled PMs that don't exist in the pooled counterparts. In case there are (need to check that), it should be easy to implement them also in the pooled versions.
> Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB persistence managers
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-2803
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803
> Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: config, jackrabbit-core
> Reporter: Jukka Zitting
> Fix For: 2.2.0
>
>
> In JCR-1456 and Jackrabbit 2.0 we introduced database connection pooling, but decided to keep the existing database bundle persistence managers intact to avoid potential regressions. We haven't seen such problems even though pooled bundle persistence has been the default since the 2.0 release, so I think it would be safe to deprecate all the non-pooled bundle DB PMs.
> And in order to remove duplicate code (that has already complicated some changes within o.a.j.persistence), I'd also take the extra step of making the o.a.j.p.bundle.* classes extend respective the o.a.j.p.pool.* classes. This would automatically allow also old non-pooled configurations to benefit from connection pooling.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[jira] Resolved: (JCR-2803) Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB
persistence managers
Posted by "Jukka Zitting (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Jukka Zitting resolved JCR-2803.
--------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Jukka Zitting
Done in revisions 1036356 and 1036365.
I reviewed the configuration parameters, and verified that all parameters supported by non-pooled bundle db PMs are also supported by the respective pooled versions.
> Deprecate non-pooled bundle DB persistence managers
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-2803
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-2803
> Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: config, jackrabbit-core
> Reporter: Jukka Zitting
> Assignee: Jukka Zitting
> Fix For: 2.2.0
>
>
> In JCR-1456 and Jackrabbit 2.0 we introduced database connection pooling, but decided to keep the existing database bundle persistence managers intact to avoid potential regressions. We haven't seen such problems even though pooled bundle persistence has been the default since the 2.0 release, so I think it would be safe to deprecate all the non-pooled bundle DB PMs.
> And in order to remove duplicate code (that has already complicated some changes within o.a.j.persistence), I'd also take the extra step of making the o.a.j.p.bundle.* classes extend respective the o.a.j.p.pool.* classes. This would automatically allow also old non-pooled configurations to benefit from connection pooling.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.