-
1. Re: Removing hypersonic support
tfennelly Feb 4, 2008 9:02 AM (in response to kconner)Kev, you forgot to tell us what the issue are with hsql ;-)
-
2. Re: Removing hypersonic support
kconner Feb 4, 2008 9:14 AM (in response to kconner)Mea Culpa :)
The main issue with hypersonic, certainly the one which is biting us the most now, is that it does not support transaction isolation.
This is something that we need, within the jBPM integration area and other areas. -
3. Re: Removing hypersonic support
jeffdelong Feb 4, 2008 2:13 PM (in response to kconner)Customers tend to use either MySQL or Postgres.
-
4. Re: Removing hypersonic support
kurtstam Feb 4, 2008 2:19 PM (in response to kconner)Looks to me we should stick to an all java db so we can run with them OOTB. I'm using derby on the scout and jUDDI projects. Seems to work ok.
--Kurt -
5. Re: Removing hypersonic support
kconner Feb 4, 2008 2:38 PM (in response to kconner)I did ask about java DBs on purpose ;)
h2 and derby are the ones I have experience with. Derby is quite slow in comparison to h2 but the biggest factor in this is probably the fact that h2 doesn't sync the database to disk as often. If this was a production system then I would be worried by that but for a non production demo I wouldn't.
Do you guys have experience of other java DBs? -
6. Re: Removing hypersonic support
marklittle Feb 5, 2008 1:27 PM (in response to kconner)Derby (aka Cloudscape) is fine and has the advantage of being around for many years. I'd trust it.
-
7. Re: Removing hypersonic support
kukeltje Feb 17, 2008 6:50 PM (in response to kconner)maybe jBPM itself should switch as well. Maybe you could file an issue there as well.