db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jean T. Anderson" <...@bristowhill.com>
Subject Re: Derby and portability
Date Thu, 17 Nov 2005 01:31:32 GMT
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> Oyvind.Bakksjo@Sun.COM wrote:
> 
>>The Derby Project Charter (on the web site) states that it should be
>>"Pure Java", but it does not say anything about portability for anything
>>but the _code_.
>>
>>Can one, for example, safely assume that the on-disk database format is
>>platform-independent? I have read it somewhere, but I don't see it in
>>the charter, so do I have a guarantee that this is an invariant?
> 
> 
> The on-disk database format is, by design, portable, actually in Java
> it's very hard to do anything else.
> 
> You know it's one of the two things that I take for granted with Derby,
> because of Java, and always forget to tell people of this useful
> benefit. The other is that Unicode is supported and is the only
> character set supported, as it's a super-set of all character sets.
> 
> Interestingly both of these useful facts are omitted from the
> documentation. :-(

logged DERBY-711 to get this into the docs.

  -jean


Mime
View raw message