Re: Comments on adding more connection URL parameters.

On 04/02/2004 06:04 Oliver Jowett wrote:
> [snip]
> DriverManager.getConnection() has a variant that takes a Properties
> object, so I'd expect apps to support reading properties from a
> configuration file to pass to the driver. Maybe it'd be preferable to
> encourage apps to take this route rather than having a huge URL string.
> I'm not sure we need to support passing a properties file location in
> the URL (3) if we do this.

For web application developers who use connection pooling (e.g., me)
passing parameters in the URL would be the preferred option. ATM, I can't
see how putting the name of a properties file in the URL would really help
as deciding on a valid physical location for the file can be problematic
and is highly container-specific. For my purposes, JNDI would be
preferable to a properties file if it is decided to add facilities beyond
URL paramters.
--
Paul Thomas
+------------------------------+---------------------------------------------+
| Thomas Micro Systems Limited | Software Solutions for the Smaller
Business |
| Computer Consultants |
http://www.thomas-micro-systems-ltd.co.uk |
+------------------------------+---------------------------------------------+