qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Colin Crist" <colincr...@hermesjms.com>
Subject RE: persistence
Date Wed, 06 Sep 2006 20:44:50 GMT

I'm only an observer on this list but I'd recommend looking at HOWL as a
high speed way to asynchonously spool state into a relational database (or
other store). This is probably easier to do now rather than later given the
recovery implications. 


Also, FWIW (as I say I am only an observer!) it may be better to shy away
from any O/R layer and keep as close to the database as you can. No doubt
the abstractions you'll put in place however will give you a multitude of
options for how to map to the final store, its these interfaces that would
be good to stabalise now.



-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Lynch [mailto:frank@iona.com] 
Sent: 06 September 2006 21:30
To: qpid-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: persistence

I'd like to start working on a persistence solution for Qpid that will be
compatible with our apache licensed implementation. I've been thinking about
iBatis + Derby for this. I like the flexibility that iBatis brings, as it
allows users to tweak the database table format/schema if necessary and its
easy to slot in an enterprise
strength database (like Oracle, Sybase etc) in leiu of Derby.   
Has anyone any opinions or thoughts on this, or should I just start hacking
away at an iBatis based persistence implementation?  

View raw message