Mailing-List: contact derby-user-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Discussion" <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
From: Michael Segel <msegel@segel.com>
Organization: MSCC
To: "Derby Discussion" <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Does any one has experience with both derby and Mysql ?
 performance comparesion
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 18:11:00 -0600
User-Agent: KMail/1.8
References: <87ee9b170511170311l749c33a0s66ad5835dbc672b2@mail.gmail.com>
 <87ee9b170511181358q60850225w5b3a589cfefbe9b8@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87ee9b170511181358q60850225w5b3a589cfefbe9b8@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200511181811.00474.msegel@segel.com>

On Friday 18 November 2005 15:58, Legolas Woodland wrote:
> Please can some on share his/her knowledge about this item.
> It will help me so much to complete my job.
>
>  On 11/17/05, Legolas Woodland <legolas.w@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> > Thank you for reading my post.
> > does any one has don a ttest to compare both Mysql and derby , in regard
> > to Tra/second or
> > insert/select statement execution time ?
> > I had chance to use mysql 5 or Derby for a 20-30 tra/second application .
> > now which one is better to user , and perform better for my case.
> >   Thank you so much

You're going to have to provide a little bit more information. 

Because of Derby-47, depending on the planned queries you may run, Derby may 
not be your best choice.

-- 
Michael Segel
Principal 
MSCC