Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 18:45:03 +0530
From: Anurag shekhar <Anurag.Shekhar@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: Using StorageFactory to create temporary files
In-reply-to: <44D0DCCC.9040700@sbcglobal.net>
Sender: Anurag.Shekhar@Sun.COM
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Message-id: <44D1F6D7.2090805@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <44D0C5A1.6010307@sun.com> <44D0DCCC.9040700@sbcglobal.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060615)

Let me explain why I need a temporary file. I need a storage where 
blob/clob can be stored before writing into the table. As the size of 
lob can go upto 2gb its not possible to keep it in memory. I am using 
the temporary file to keep the byte/string in case the the size grows 
more than 4k.

So the temporary file will be created and accessed from the jdbc driver. 
I decided to use StorageFactory because it already have the nessasary 
permission for disk i/o. In case derby is running on a special storage, 
the StorageFactory will be aware of it and will be able to create 
temporary file for that device.
thanks
anurag
Mike Matrigali wrote:
> This is an unexpected usage, this was never designed for that purpose.
> It was originally designed as a module only to be used underneath the
> store module.  The purpose was to allow alternate implementations of
> the underlying filesystem.
>
> I wonder why straight java i/o stream interfaces were not used?  Is
> there anything being provided by the StorageFactory that a direct
> use of java io does not easily provide?
>
> I think it would be especially a bad idea to use the storage factory
> on the client side of network server as it is going to draw in a lot
> of other stuff not currently needed by the client jar.
>
> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>> The patch attached to DERBY-1341 uses the StorageFactory to create a 
>> temporary file on behalf of the embedded JDBC layer. Is this usage 
>> OK? Does this violate some assumptions about what server layers are 
>> allowed to use the StorageFactory?
>>
>> Would appreciate guidance here. I am out of my depth.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Rick
>>
>>
>