db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bernt Marius Johnsen <bernt.john...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: Inaccuracies in H2's claims: Autocounter/Sequqnce-Numbers
Date Wed, 25 May 2011 09:28:59 GMT
Hi,

There was some rounds on this with the H2 guy on this some years ago 
too. Back then the claim on e.g. limit/offset where correct btw., so it 
was basically the performance claim that was the topic. But they did not 
seem to want to correct that claim.

I also find the PolePosition "benchmark" a bit dubious.


On 05/25/2011 11:02 AM, Lukas Eder wrote:
> I have been following this thread curiously and raised the question on
> the H2 user group:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database/browse_thread/thread/bc712e8607ab073b
>
> 2011/5/25<Malte.Kempff@de.equens.com>:
>>
>> May be the Article used an older version of derby. T's a pity that they don't say
what version were used for comparison.
>>
>>
>> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Rick Hillegas [mailto:rick.hillegas@oracle.com]
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2011 20:12
>> An: Derby Discussion
>> Betreff: Inaccuracies in H2's claims: Autocounter/Sequqnce-Numbers
>>
>> There seem to a number of mis-statements on this page:
>>
>> o The performance claim.
>>
>> o The claim that Derby doesn't have an "Explain plan" feature.
>>
>> o The claim that Derby doesn't support user-defined datatypes.
>>
>> o The claim that Derby doesn't support sequences.
>>
>> o The claim that Derby doesn't support limit/offset.
>>
>> o The claim that Derby doesn't support case-insensitive columns.
>>
>> On 5/24/11 10:02 AM, Tim Dudgeon wrote:
>>> It was not me who said Derby is slow. I'm using it in embedded mode
>>> all the time and performance is great.
>>> I was just pointing out that others are saying things that seem to be
>>> wrong, and some action might be wanted.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> On 23/05/2011 17:00, Matt Pouttu-Clarke wrote:
>>>> Tim,
>>>>
>>>> Does H2 allow multiple concurrent threads to update the database?
>>>> I'm not
>>>> sure it's fair to compare a single threaded database to a multi-threaded
>>>> database with a single threaded workload.
>>>>
>>>> I have done benchmarks that show that Derby is much faster than H2
>>>> with a
>>>> multi-threaded workload in embedded mode.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/21/11 3:56 AM, "Tim Dudgeon"<tdudgeon@informaticsmatters.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There are some other things here that might deserve some comment:
>>>>> http://www.h2database.com/html/features.html#comparison
>>>>>
>>>>> e.g. performance of embeded derby is slow!
>>>>>
>>>>> Tiim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18/05/2011 16:05,
>>>>> Malte.Kempff@de.equens.com wrote:
>>>>>> Hi to all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in http://www.h2database.com/html/features.html#feature_list I found
>>>>>> this particular statement to above topic:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Sequence*and autoincrement columns, computed columns (can be used
for
>>>>>> function based indexes)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Later on is a matrix that shows some RDBMs in releation to some
>>>>>> features
>>>>>> where it is denied that Derby supports sequences.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what is actually the case? And if Derby supports running numbers
>>>>>> (in
>>>>>> Oracle they are called /sequences/, in Microsoft DBs the are often
>>>>>> called /auto counters/) how are they to be used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks in advance for any hint
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Malte
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> iCrossing Privileged and Confidential Information
>>>> This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
>>>> and may contain confidential and privileged information of iCrossing.
>>>> Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
>>>> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
>>>> sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message