jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Filesystem versus PersistenceManager questions
Date Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:05:10 GMT
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Thomas Müller <thomas.mueller@day.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> 2) It appears as if there is no good file system backed PM . . . is
>> Not sure day.com's TAR PM is based on file system or not. It's best so
>> far from what I read from the list.
>
> Yes, the Tar PM (Tar File Persistence Manager) is file based. It is
> very fast, faster than the database persistence managers. Also, it is
> transactionally safe (unlike BundleFsPersistenceManager) and supports
> clustering.
>
>>> 3) Is the Derby PM considered production worthy?  Any reason not to use it?
>
> Another potential problem is performance.

i beg to differ ;) perfomance of embedded derby is IMO very good,
especially when
compared to oracle, mssql, mysql, etc.  h2 might be even a tad quicker though...

cheers
stefan

>
> Regards,
> Thomas
>

Mime
View raw message