Dear Frank: Thanks for the suggestions.
> Marc's idea with a HSQLDB server, which can be connected from both Base and other applications, sounds like a good idea to me. You loose the all-in-one-file then, of course, not sure how much this is a limitation in your scenario. It is not a limitation. It is more about design choice. Losing "all-in-one-file" package convenience (for maintenance on user side), and losing OO Base GUI (for occasional manual admin.). There is not much value left to keep OO Base in the integration list. So OO Base is effectively out of the integration list if HSQLDB is run in standalone server mode, just like any other JDBC RDBMS. > If you connect to a running OOo instance, which may run in another process, then you have two JVMs involved. Transporting the java.sql.Connection object from the one JVM to the other might be completely impossible, architecture-wise. This is an interesting revelation. Do you imply that it is possible in OO 2.2.0 to transport the java.sql.Connection object in the same JVM? Would it then be possible in the same JVM to extract java.sql.Connection from sdbc.Xconnection? If the answer is yes, the following approach might work in OO 2.2.0: application (local, JVM 1) + OO XComponentContext (local, bootstrapped from JVM 1) + GUI (local OO Calc, bootstrapped from XComponentContext in JVM 1) + data 1 (local OO Base *.odb, bootstrapped from XComponentContext in JVM 1) + data 2 (JDBC RDBMS) + data 3 (JDBC RDBMS) + etc. Ray --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
