openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reizinger Zoltán <>
Subject Re: questions about Base---do we need an embedded DB?
Date Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:08:38 GMT
2013.03.29. 17:25 keltezéssel, Michael Lam írta:
> On 03/28/2013 01:24 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak <
>>> wrote:
>>> On 03/27/2013 04:57 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>> Well Derby does seem to be "embed-able ". See:

>>>> This has been suggested before, as early as 2006. See:

>>>> Still, is any embedded DB  a good thing? Pros and cons...
>>> PRO:
>>> * Very convenient for small things. Imagine if I said that you can 
>>> write a
>>> document in Write, but you must first install an external 
>>> application that
>>> Write will connect to. This is rather daunting for new users. Also, 
>>> most
>>> external systems I expect probably use multiple files, so, if I want to
>>> simply create something small and send it to you, well, I can't do that
>>> easily unless I zip up a directory, send it to you, and then expect 
>>> you to
>>> install the same DB that I used and then make it work.  So, it boils 
>>> down
>>> to an ability to create a small single file DB.
>>> CON:
>>> * Our current Embedded DB works poorly with large DB, and someone 
>>> who does
>>> not know better may try to create a very large DB and have performance
>>> issues.
>>> If it is not reliable, then it is probably better to not exist.
>>> -- 
>>> Andrew Pitonyak
>>> My Macro Document: 
>>> Info:
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- 
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**<>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> This has been a very good discussion so far.
>> I would again like to emphasize two things about our current
>> situation/implementation:
>> * the requirement of Java 6 by end users to get acceptable 
>> performance from
>> Base.
>> (More testing of builds will be needed to determine if this holds 
>> true for
>> Java 7 and HSQL 2.2.9. Perhaps additional changes are needed to the
>> connectivity portions of AOO).
>> * the current and perhaps future issues in terms of development 
>> maintenance
>> for the embedded DB
>> In any case, we need to keep in mind this is a volunteer community.
> I have been working on updating the HSQL to the latest version. I have 
> most of the configure and build portion ready but I did run into an 
> issue which I addressed here
> I have tested Base with version 2.2.9 and it does address the issues 
> that the current patches are created for. Overall, most of the issues 
> seem to be within the AOO code. I have tried to look into some of them 
> but having made too much progress. Personally I am having a hard time 
> locating the issue, I am still trying to get use to the build system 
> and the code structure. For example, there is an issue with setting 
> the default date on a column but I am unable to locate the UI code for 
> it.
The all hsqldb 2.0 intagration work finished in Oracle era, OOo3.4 but 
the final integration postponed to 3.5 version or later time.
It contains lot of code change.
All code was stored in cws hsqldb19:
The code transfer to ASF is not clear to me.

I did the user side QA work, if I have time will help you. I have no 
coding knowledge.

First need to clarify the cws hsqldb19 code usage, to prevent duplicate 

> As a volunteer, I am going to concentrate on Base. I have been meaning 
> to ask on the list if others would like to work together to get it 
> back into shape. Any takers?
> Michael
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message