db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew McIntyre" <mcintyr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: default ij protocol (was Re: [WWD] review suspended)
Date Fri, 24 Feb 2006 19:51:12 GMT
And, I just had a chat with Deepa, Kathey, and Jean on IRC that I will
summarize below, where several concerns about how this might affect
the user in a client/server setting were discussed, along with some
good ideas concerning ij, default protocols and the use of DataSources
in J2ME were discussed.

andrew


marsden	Hi andrew. Were your ears ringing?

samcintyre	:-) no, i just decided to show up. got a question for me?

marsden	We were talking about your ij proposal.
marsden	Will it confuse network server users who might
marsden	1) Start network server
marsden	2) ij> connect 'mydb;create=true';
marsden	but will actually connect embedded.
marsden	They won't figure it out until they see a dual boot message
connecting from another jvm or find their database was created in the
wrong place

samcintyre	an excellent question. the answer is yes, maybe. definitely
something to point out in the docs. I think one of Dan's goal for his
holistic getting started approach was to get people executing SQL as
quickly as possible. In this case it would mean not even starting
Network Server.

marsden	ok

samcintyre	I've always thought ij needed a way to default to
connecting with the net client, but i've not thought it through much.
samcintyre	perhaps a command line option? ij -client? something seems
weird about that, but...

marsden	Somthing. I don't know what. And a message "Starting ij in
embedded mode. To connect to network server ..." or some such

samcintyre	(speaking of which, that's another thing ij needs, is a
usage message a --help or -? option)

marsden	I don't have any good ideas. I just found the default a little worrisome

jta	--help would be great

marsden	just more great stuff to do....

samcintyre	actually, I think that's a great idea, Kathey. The ij
embedded vs. ij client distinction has been a problem since network
server arrived. A message stating which mode you're in, as well as
instructions on how to switch modes seems to hit the mark.

samcintyre	Yes, we always seem to be very good at coming up with
things to do. :-)

marsden	I remember when I first started with Cloudscape I had the
hardest time getting my head around the idea of an embedded database.
I cannot remember now why, but I know it happens to a lot of new
users.

marsden	Before you came, Deepa had made mention of DERBY-597 and J2ME.
Whatever is done in terms of defaults, it would be good to consider
J2ME and ij.dataSource as well.

samcintyre	ok. haven't looked at 597 in a while. Seems like ij could
detect a J2ME environment by checking JVMInfo and switch to a
datasource, regardless of whether ij.protocol was set. That would
require having a default for ij.datasource as well.

samcintyre	yes, looks like 597 didn't set a default, just switches to
use the datasource if no protocol is provided in the URL.

Deepa[1]	checking JVMInfo sounds like a good idea. currently ij just
checks for ij.datasource property and if found uses it to get the
connection.
Deepa[1]	connect url should not have the protocol part in it.
something like ij> connect 'mydb;create=true';

samcintyre	yes. what if ij.protocol is set? I guess we could likewise
detect a J2ME environment and not set a default protocol in that case.

Deepa[1]	test harness sees if ij.dataSource is set and removes
ij.database and ij.protocol from the system properties
Deepa[1]	so we may need to do what you said "detect a J2ME environment
and not set a default protocol"

samcintyre	right, that would be happening in ij, not in the test harness.

Mime
View raw message