db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lance J. Andersen" <Lance.Ander...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Derby vs. PostgreSQL
Date Wed, 11 May 2005 13:44:25 GMT


Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

>Simon wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Bad - One thing that concerned me greatly was the ambiguity around
>>whether the driver was going to be released - yes, amazing, but true -
>>originally the whole DB was redistributable as open source but not the
>>driver to access it!  
>>    
>>
>
>To be fair the main (embedded) JDBC driver to access it was released
>under open source. I was surprised how many folks immediately used the
>networked JDBC driver, rather than the embedded mode. But then it was
>always a mind shift for folks to understand the embedded JDBC driver was
>the complete database engine. Client/Server is more naturally understood
>as it is more typical.
>  
>
The reason that some of us always use the network JDBC driver is due to 
the environment we have to run in.  For example, in a J2EE world,  I 
need to be able to have my application client be able to access the same 
database
as my web or ejb apps.  This would not be possible for the majority of 
J2EE app servers without a redesign of  at least their application 
client container.

The other issue is that there are a couple of  problems with the 
embedded driver that we need to address (shreyas is working on these) 
that we did not encounter with the network driver.

In many cases, using the embedded driver is the way to go though.


>  
>
>>Well, I think this has been fixed for the java
>>access, but as far as I know if you want ODBC you are still NOT able
>>to redistribute the driver.   I would love to hear if this is going to
>>change.
>>    
>>
>
>Do I hear a volunteer for an open source ODBC driver for Derby?
>
>Dan.
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message