Message-ID: <40A4EB6C.3000706@bea.com> Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 08:53:16 -0700 From: Joe Weinstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server To: postbus@sybrandb.verwijderdit.demon.nl Subject: Re: Oracle 9i RAC JDBC listener connection load balancing References: <883a0924.0405131228.40c2dab3@posting.google.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.148.48.12 X-Trace: news.beasys.com 1084549992 216.148.48.12 (14 May 2004 08:53:12 -0700) Organization: BEA SYSTEMS Inc Lines: 28 Path: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01a.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsfeed.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!elk.ncren.net!news2.wam.umd.edu!nntp.abs.net!ash.uu.net!news.beasys.com!not-for-mail Xref: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com comp.databases.oracle.server:261646 Sybrand Bakker wrote: > On 14 May 2004 00:22:30 -0700, mccmx@hotmail.com (Matt) wrote: > > >>As far as I know TAF doesn't support thin JDBC connections.... > > > So what? The thin driver is superior in reliability. Bugs in OCI can kill a JVM, and some customer's java programs are equally important to their DBMS. Also, the thin driver is prefered because it is self-sufficient, and can be installed and run anywhere there's a JVM, without the platform-specific, large, and to-be-managed Oracle client package. The real issue is that TAF isn't. At least not for the general JDBC client (thin or thick). Regards, Joe Weinstein at BEA > > > -- > Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA