Well I sure would not run a production application with relaxed durability turned on ;) *unless* 1) I can guarantee my system will never crash _or_ 2) my databases are completely read-only (not even sure we would not still see issues here with the log but this is just speculation assuming temp files used for large sort ops are not logged ), 3) _or_ tha t I would not care to rebuild my DBs in case of corruption, etc...
"Once the database is booted with derby.system.durability=test, there are no guarantees that the database is consistent."
On 10/11/05, Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
Norbert Toth-Gati wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> I have changed some mails with Stephen Fitch, he said he is working on this.
> If feature is requested so frequent, is it possible to hope it will
> get a higher priority and get some where in the front of the TODO
> list?
Why do you need an in-memory version of Derby? Have you tried Derby with
the relaxed durability if you are concerned about performance?
http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/10.1/tuning/rtunproperdurability.html
Providing a good reason whty something is needed is a definite help in
motivating people to scratch that itch! :-)
Dan.
