db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jianhui Jin" <ced1...@leeds.ac.uk>
Subject RE: Derby vs. HSQL but apache win
Date Thu, 09 Sep 2004 17:08:44 GMT
I am more keen at performance, the reason I am going for a database is
tired of worrying about memory capacity, 
Do want to do caching myself. So database for me is a good caching
engine. Therefore a embeded database is perfect for me.
But also don't want to get a too bad speed. So, I am still a bit


-----Original Message-----
From: Steen Jansdal [mailto:steen@jansdal.dk] 
Sent: 09 September 2004 17:57
To: Derby Discussion
Subject: RE: Derby vs. HSQL but apache win

> Just turn auto-commit off, run 10000
> Not so much difference between derby and hsql, but still slightly 
> slower, about 50% slower.
> But I will still go for Derby, because I trust apache,
> hope a new release come soon. I need a stable version urgently for my 
> contract.
> Cheers
> Jin

I have picked Derby too for two reasons that are a must for me.

1. Derby is fail-safe. Accidental power failure doesn't corrupt the
database or loose committed data.

2. Derby databases aren't limited to 2 Gb.


View raw message