db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: In Memory
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2006 04:45:46 GMT
FYI, the issue with "durability:test" is not that you may lose some 
data, it's that your data may become corrupt on failure and you won't be 
able to reboot it.  This is fine for unit testing, that's why it's 
called "test".

DERBY-646 needs to be tested and documented.  It sure would be nice to 
get this in there, we keep getting this request.

David

Andrew McIntyre wrote:
> On 7/31/06, Chris Forbis <chris_forbis@symantec.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I was looking at derby and the FAQ says in Memory version has not been
>> completed, but to check with list..  It also said this about six 
>> months ago
>> :)  Just wondering if anything is being done on it...
> 
> This feature request is being tracked with DERBY-646 in JIRA:
> 
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-646
> 
> Feel free to pick up the work that has been done there and continue it
> if you are interested. There are comments in JIRA that describe what
> work remains to be done.
> 
> If you are not interested in working on the feature, and the
> durability of your databases is not concern for you, then you could
> achieve similar performance by running with the property
> derby.system.durability set to "test":
> 
> http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/dev/tuning/rtunproperdurability.html
> 
> HTH,
> andrew

Mime
View raw message