directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [ServerEntry] We may need our own JDBM code base
Date Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:27:30 GMT
Hi Jörg,

On Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM, Jörg Henne <j.henne@levigo.de> wrote:

> Emmanuel Lecharny schrieb:
> > Any other solution in mind ?
> not having done any work on the backend makes it impossible for me to
> make well-founded comments on the issue. However, the recent discussion
> around splay trees and the problems with the current JDBM layer got me
> thinking that the requirements of the database layer are almost entirely
> identical to those of the RDBMS:
> - entries are reasonably similar to tuples
> - all indexes are essentially secondary indexes
> - DNs are are similar to a primary key, but may also be treated like a
> secondary one.
>

Yes exactly.  Also like an RDBMS we will eventually need to have some temp
spaces for improving operations on certain search controls like sorting (i.e.
building a special index for a specific search).  Just some ideas we've been
tossing around.


>
> Some not-so-lateral thinking brings up the question of whether it is
> really necessary to invent another wheel. The idea may be totally silly,
> and the required effort may easily make the think not worthwhile, but
> what about having a look at Derby's store layer:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/StoreLayerLinks
> and in particular http://db.apache.org/derby/papers/btree_package.html
>

Good idea.  I did have these conversations a long long time ago with Daniel
Debrunner while Derby was still incubating.  We found some issues but I
think we could still share some code.  This is another option for us to
consider.

Thanks this was an excellent option to point out.

Alex

Mime
View raw message