Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 50904 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2005 16:45:20 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Jul 2005 16:45:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 38207 invoked by uid 500); 13 Jul 2005 16:45:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 38131 invoked by uid 500); 13 Jul 2005 16:45:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Derby Development" Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 38118 invoked by uid 99); 13 Jul 2005 16:45:18 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:45:18 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.4 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_FAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [32.97.110.129] (HELO e31.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.129) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:45:16 -0700 Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.106]) by e31.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6DGjGM7272104 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:45:16 -0400 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j6DGjF5b229264 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:45:15 -0600 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j6DGjFto017289 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:45:15 -0600 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (DMCSDJDT41P.usca.ibm.com [9.72.133.82]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j6DGjBjf017094 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:45:15 -0600 Message-ID: <42D544F8.2000500@debrunners.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:44:40 -0700 From: Daniel John Debrunner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Derby Development Subject: Re: [jira] Created: (DERBY-458) Make it clear the difference between EmbedConnection and Networked Connection References: <471674011.1121268793592.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> <006601c587c2$96503050$0800a8c0@Arkat> In-Reply-To: <006601c587c2$96503050$0800a8c0@Arkat> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N TomohitoNakayama wrote: > Hello. > > My current thinking about this issue.... > > I think one of important difference between EmbedConnection and > Networked Connection is that > EmbedConnection exists as an object in sigle process, > hence Networked Connection exists as multiple objects in multiple processes > which are connected (implicitly, separated) by network and acts > synchronization with each other. Are you interested in implementation differences, or behaviour differences as seen by the application? The difference you describe is an implementation difference. For behaviour as seen by an application the goal is to have no differences, and current known issues are described in DERBY-310. Dan.