On Oct 7, 2004, at 5:33 AM, Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Khin, Gerald wrote:
The only resort I come up with is that a well behaving library, that
wants to use embedded Derby, must not try to hide its usage, or has to
do some classloader things. I think, the most convenient solution from
the Derby using developers point of view would be if Derby would provide
a concept that extends its current system concept to support multiple
systems.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by multiple systems. Can you give examples of the benefits of this? E.g. if app1 is using db1 and app2 is using db2 then what would be gained with two Derby systems over the single one that is supported today?
You see this in large production environments. A good example is an ISP which offers web application hosting. There may be dozens of applications, each with a different database. In this case the customers of the ISP would not know who else is running on the server and would not coordinate with each other. You also see this type of non-cooperation in large portal installations. This trend to non-cooperating applications will only increase as JSR 168 (the portlet spec) rolls out.
-dain
