Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 27009 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2006 00:37:49 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 28 Jul 2006 00:37:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 43273 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jul 2006 00:37:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-user-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 43252 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jul 2006 00:37:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-user-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Derby Discussion" Delivered-To: mailing list derby-user@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 43241 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jul 2006 00:37:48 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 17:37:48 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.9 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS,NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [204.127.192.81] (HELO rwcrmhc11.comcast.net) (204.127.192.81) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 17:37:47 -0700 Received: from rmailcenter79.comcast.net ([204.127.197.179]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with SMTP id <20060728003726m1100l3h9be>; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 00:37:26 +0000 Received: from [68.54.87.125] by rmailcenter79.comcast.net; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 00:37:26 +0000 From: dmclean62@comcast.net To: "Derby Discussion" Subject: Re: Startup time for Derby Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 00:37:26 +0000 Message-Id: <072820060037.28491.44C95C460000B98400006F4B2200761064CDC0020E0A040C030B@comcast.net> X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Apr 11 2006) X-Authenticated-Sender: ZG1jbGVhbjYyQGNvbWNhc3QubmV0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I use Hibernate on top of Derby and the startup time for Hibernate is much longer than the startup time for Derby - even for brand new databases that are created from scratch with each running of a unit test. Donald -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: David Van Couvering > I am here at OSCON and a user of Derby was complaining rather > energetically to me at the cost of startup time for Derby. He said this > is a real problem for running unit tests, as this is compounded by > running multiple tests, each one starting up a new database. > > I was wondering if other users out there have a similar complaint and if > you can give a sense of how important this is. If you can describe your > specific usage pattern that would be very helpful.