db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bryan Pendleton (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-4084) Determine the subSubProtocol name for the in-memory back end
Date Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:14:50 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4084?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12680186#action_12680186
] 

Bryan Pendleton commented on DERBY-4084:
----------------------------------------

I'm not sure I understand all the implications of the in-memory back end, but if it
means that my data is completely transient and will be wholly discarded when the 
database is shut down, then I'd be in favor of a URL which makes that rather explicit:

  jdbc:derby:transient:mydb
  jdbc:derby:memory-only:mydb
  jdbc:derby:in-memory:mydb
  jdbc:derby:non-persistent:mydb


> Determine the subSubProtocol name for the in-memory back end
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4084
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4084
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>    Affects Versions: 10.5.0.0
>            Reporter: Kristian Waagan
>
> The community should agree on a name for the subSubProtocol for the in-memory back end.
The name will be used in the connection URL, and it is the mechanism used to tell Derby to
use the in-memory back end:
> jdbc:derby:subSubProtocol:dbName
> Two hot candidates are:
>  o mem
>  o memory
> The former is shorter, the latter is slightly more descriptive. If you have opinions
on this, please post a comment.
> We should decide on this before we cut the branch for 10.5.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message