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: domain of jta@bristowhill.com designates
 66.75.162.133 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <437BDD74.7090705@bristowhill.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:31:32 -0800
From: "Jean T. Anderson" <jta@bristowhill.com>
Reply-To: jta@bristowhill.com
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-1.3.2 (X11/20050324)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Derby Discussion <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Derby and portability
References: <437B58A3.6010506@sun.com> <437BD555.4040503@debrunners.com>
In-Reply-To: <437BD555.4040503@debrunners.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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