All of pool implementations I have ever saw have too much of wokarounds(background threads, automagic, abandoning ).
The most of statements in this paper is not true, DBCP has too much of "features", It is possible to fix DBCP (remove workarounds), but looks like this automagic stuff has too mutch of fans and community will break open source implementation anyway.
jhoeller wrote:
After all, isn't it peculiar that we still have to worry about a proper open source *connection pool* implementation in 2003? One could naively assume that such basic stuff would have been around for a long time already - stable and battle-proven.
Of course, one can always resort to the J2EE container's pool implementation. But it would be really nice to have a stable pool implementation for lightweight local usage within applications. I still hope that Commons DBCP will become that.
Juergen