db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: is there a lower-level (non-SQL) API for Derby?
Date Tue, 20 Jan 2009 18:58:45 GMT
Hi Brian,

The last time the community discussed this, there was some concern that 
this effort would fall outside Derby's charter. One way forward might be 
to create an experimental branch in which to prototype a solution. If 
the prototype attracted enough interest, then we could take it to the 
Apache Incubator and attempt to create a new, related DB subproject.

Here, for instance, is something which we could prototype in a branch: 
We could create a small wrapper API around Derby. The jar file 
containing this small wrapper would be what the related Apache project 
ultimately delivers and you would use it together with the existing 
Derby jars. I'm thinking that for operations like creating/dropping a 
container (i.e., a table) you might not see a performance gain but for 
simple gets and puts you could see the 15-20% improvement. Of the 
benefits listed at the end of this message, this solution would deliver 
benefit (3) and to a smaller extent benefit (2). It would not deliver 
benefit (1): the code footprint of this solution would actually be a 
little larger than native Derby and memory and disk usage would be 
pretty much the same.

Would a solution like this be useful for you?


Brian Peterson wrote:
> Hi Rick,
> I've tried following up with this because I'd be interested in using this
> lighter version. From what I've been able to find, it looks like you started
> to set up the goals for such an effort. Is this effort still moving forward?
> My chief need would be speed -- factoring out the overhead of the JDBC/SQL
> interface. I see someone else noted that this has been measured at 15-20%
> for lookups on simple tables. I would definitely use the subsystem to get a
> 20% improvement when using an embedded database.
> Brian 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM [mailto:Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 9:49 AM
> To: Derby Discussion
> Cc: derby-dev@db.apache.org
> Subject: Re: is there a lower-level (non-SQL) API for Derby?
> Hi Tim,
> This question has come up before. For instance, you may find some 
> interesting discussion on the following email thread: 
> http://www.nabble.com/simpler-api-to-the-Derby-store-td18137499.html#a181374
> 99
> The Derby storage layer is supposed to be an independent component. The 
> api is described in the javadoc for the 
> org.apache.derby.iapi.store.access package: 
> http://db.apache.org/derby/javadoc/engine/
> What would you say are your chief needs? Are you looking for a version 
> of Derby which is
> 1) smaller
> 2) faster
>   or
> 3) easier-to-use
> Hope this helps,
> -Rick
> Tim Dugan wrote:
>> I'm looking to see if Derby can be used similarly to Berkeley DB -- a 
>> lower-level API.  Can anyone tell me?
>> Maybe to the access area of the "Store Layer" which in some Derby 
>> documentation is described like this:
>>     "The Store layer is split into two main areas, access and raw. The
>>     access layer presents a conglomerate (table or index)/row based
>>     interface to the SQL layer. It handles table scans, index scans,
>>     index lookups, indexing, sorting, locking policies, transactions,
>>     isolation levels."
>> Now that Derby is included in Java 16--I am having a really hard time 
>> finding Java documentation that talks about Derby.

View raw message