lukas.eder at gmail.com
Sat Jul 28 09:29:57 UTC 2018
As this topic has been discussed many times on this list before with no
success, I'm very curious to learn what kinds of arguments at the SFJUG
finally made you change your mind about the topic. I'm sure I can learn a
trick or two in persuasive techniques :-)
Am Do., 26. Juli 2018 um 17:54 Uhr schrieb Douglas Surber <
douglas.surber at oracle.com>:
> I presented ADBA at the San Francisco Java Users Group last night. It was
> great. There were a number of folks who were strong advocates of reactive
> streams and we talked for well over an hour after the presentation ended.
> The kind of feedback we got last night is critical to the future success of
> this project.
> This discussion resulted in a concrete proposal to make ADBA better
> integrate with reactive streams. I’m working on the API updates in a branch
> and will push that branch ASAP. At present this is strictly a idea under
> discussion as it is a substantial change and we won’t go down this path
> without more discussion from the wider community.
> The proposal is easy to describe though there are definitely some tricky
> bits in the actual API design.
> - Replace Submission everywhere with java.util.concurrent.Flow.Publisher
> - Replace ParameterizedOperation.set(String, CompletionStage, SqlType)
> with set(String, Publisher, SqlType)
> - Make DataSource a Publisher<Session>
> That’s the core idea but there will be other changes. Effectively this
> replaces all uses of CompletionStage with Publisher. Not exactly because it
> also removes Submission as it is not needed.
> I have one small question. CompletionStage<Void> is ok. It is used to
> signal that an Operation completed with no result. Is Publisher<Void> ok? I
> assume that such a Publisher could only call onComplete or onError which is
> just what is needed for these use cases.
More information about the jdbc-spec-discuss