Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 28817 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2006 13:41:19 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Jul 2006 13:41:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 71082 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jul 2006 13:41:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 71027 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jul 2006 13:41:17 -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: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 71018 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jul 2006 13:41:17 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:41:17 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [209.237.227.198] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (209.237.227.198) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 06:41:16 -0700 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBD4D714219 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:39:30 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4807132.1152020370897.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 13:39:30 +0000 (GMT+00:00) From: "Tomohito Nakayama (JIRA)" To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1471) Implement layer B streaming for new methods defined in JDBC4.0 In-Reply-To: <15980243.1151730989827.JavaMail.jira@brutus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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 [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1471?page=comments#action_12419120 ] Tomohito Nakayama commented on DERBY-1471: ------------------------------------------ Hello Kristian. In fact, I'm not clear and no answer yet ... I think we need some more consideration for synchronizing DERBY-1417 and DERBY-1417 ... I can propose next two options. 1) Realize Layer B streaming afterwards. Realize lengthless overloads without Layer B streaming based on current implementation. Afterwards, realize Layer B streaming as improvement. 2) Realize Layer B streaming simultaneously with lengthless overloads. Realize lengthless overloads with Layer B streaming. In this plan,DERBY-1471 is completely equal to client side of DERBY-1417. My concerning is that DERBY-1471 will take much of time .... I spent more than half year for implementing Layer B streaming from server side to client side,... I think compatibility for JDBC 4.0 should have priority over Layer B streaming in our project. Furthermore, performance measurement carried out in DERBY-326 / DERBY-872 told that Layer B streaming does not always result in best performance. Sometimes, expanding object into memory before sending resulted in better performance. // I think passed length information from server helps client to handle buffer effectively. Then ... My opinion is to take option 1), "Implement Layer B streaming afterwards". I want your opinion... > Implement layer B streaming for new methods defined in JDBC4.0 > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DERBY-1471 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1471 > Project: Derby > Type: New Feature > Components: Network Client > Reporter: Tomohito Nakayama > Assignee: Tomohito Nakayama > > JDBC 4.0 introduced new methods which take parameters for object to be sent to sever without length information. > For those methods, Layer B streaming is best way to implement sending object to server. > This issue is representation of DERBY-1417 in Network Client. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira