db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luigi Lauro <luigi.la...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DERBY-2469] First alpha implementation available - help needed :)
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2007 05:19:42 GMT

On 28 Mar 2007, at 0:00, David Van Couvering wrote:

> Do you have a workaround for this bug?

There's no real workaround. There are three possibilities:

A) Having Sun acknowledge this as a bug and fix it in next 'update'  
release of the JVM. Regarding this I have good news: I just received  
the mail that they checked and they are inserting my proposal into  
the DB as a new bug. This means we can hopefully get a fix soon,  
since it's SO damn easy to fix. I will commit a patch to the JVM for  
fixing this, so Sun just have to check the patch and include it. Note  
that the bug will take a couple of days to show up in their database,  
I will warn you once it's there, so you can vote it if you want ^_^

B) Substitute the current default sun implementation with a fixed one  
by replacing it with a new one and registering it into the  
ServiceManager. I don't even know if this is really possible, since  
there we are playing tricks inside JWS sandbox, and I don't know if  
such a substitution would work or would violate the sandbox somehow.

C) Workaround the bug in the storage implementation, by not having a  
1-1 mapping as I'm presently doing, but mapping several storage file  
inside a single JNLP persistent entry. This would mean using a single  
FileContents/InputStream/OutputStream as several StorageFile, and  
would make the implementation A LOT more complex, bigger, slower and  
more bug prone. I don't want to do this except there's no other way out.

What I see this happen is: we get an implementation working and deal  
with the bug. This means you will be able to use derby databases not  
bigger than X tables/records for example... 255 is an harsh limit,  
but from what I've seen it's possible to have a small-to-medium derby  
database even with such limits. I'm currently in the process of  
investigating if there are ways to reduce the number of entities  
created by derby at an higher level, by disabling unneeded features/ 
logging or similar.

Any help here is appreciated :)

View raw message