db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <da...@vancouvering.com>
Subject Re: Derby in large scale deployment ?
Date Wed, 03 Jan 2007 20:30:38 GMT
I think in general Derby should be able to handle this, but I think you 
need to put it through it's paces, exercising with the types of 
operations you'll be submitting to it.  Important things like, are you 
mostly-read or mostly-write or half and half?  Are you doing mostly 
single-record primary key operations, or are there lots of joins and sorts?

In temrs of multiple Derby instances sharing the same Derby database, 
no, they can not simultaneously.  You can do this if you run Derby as a 
network server, but not in embedded mode.  In embedded mode, a single 
instance owns a lock on the database and no other instances are allowed 
to open connections to it.

David

vissu wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> We are contemplating of placing Derby in front of Oracle.  We would have to
> distribute 10B rows (in Oracle) across 10 Derby Servers - each would be
> holding about 1B rows. Rowsize is about 300 bytes.
> 
> Can Derby handle this volume of data ?.  
> 
> Secondly, can multiple Derby instances share same Derby Database ?. In other
> words, when one Derby updates a rows, will other Derby instances see it -
> assuming all Derby instances use file based instance and the db diretcory is
> located on a network location.  I understand that C-JDBC and other solutions
> are fasible, but we dont want to use JGroups.
> 
> 
> Thanks for any insights and help.
> 
> Vissu

Mime
View raw message