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 (athena.apache.org: domain of rick.hillegas@oracle.com
 designates 141.146.126.69 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <51D2C526.1020805@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jul 2013 05:18:46 -0700
From: Rick Hillegas <rick.hillegas@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: derby-user@db.apache.org
Subject: Re: Is there some way to shut down a Derby database faster?
References: 
 <CADuAvzdkSBYXv0wy9vLjjvW+9+2vp_y-PSVZ1DhUkELTKjmjPw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADuAvzdkSBYXv0wy9vLjjvW+9+2vp_y-PSVZ1DhUkELTKjmjPw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 7/1/13 6:01 PM, Trejkaz wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Is there some way to shut down a Derby database in a faster way?
>
> The current ;shutdown=true we're using is doing a checkpoint, which
> seems to be a particularly expensive operation.
>
> I can't rely on the "if you don't want to do the checkpoint, just
> don't shut it down" approach, because this won't release file handles
> and when the user closes the database they expect to be able to move
> the files immediately after.
>
> TX
>
If you simply exit the VM without requesting an orderly shutdown, then 
the checkpoint won't be performed. However, the cleanup performed by 
that checkpoint still has to be performed. It will be performed the next 
time you boot the database. My experience is that if you always skip the 
orderly shutdown, then the time required to boot the database grows 
progressively longer until it is intolerable. Full disclosure: I haven't 
tried this experiment for a long time and there may have been 
improvements in this area. Nevertheless, orderly shutdown is the 
recommended practice.

Hope this helps,
-Rick