[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12562759#action_12562759
]
Dibyendu Majumdar commented on DERBY-3351:
------------------------------------------
Thinking more about it - packages in services probably shouldn't be in the
Store boundary. But we need a way to ensure that the bits that the Store
depends upon are separated somehow from the bits that are needed solely for the
higher SQL layer. In other words, these bits will be come part of the contract
between the Store and Derby - so that Derby will have to guarantee the presence
of these APIs to Store.
> Implement a Pluggable Storage Engine Architecture in Derby
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-3351
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3351
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Services, SQL, Store
> Reporter: Dibyendu Majumdar
> Assignee: Dibyendu Majumdar
>
> My aim is to create a pluggable storage engine architecture for Derby, so
> that the default store implementation can be replaced with alternative
> storage engines. I have created my own storage engine which I would like to
> use with Derby's SQL layer, so that is a motivation. But I also think that
> this will benefit the community, and could lead to a pluggable storage engine
> architecture similar to that of MySQL.
> I am not yet sure where the storage engine boundary should lie. I would
> welcome input in this area.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
