[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12563648#action_12563648
]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-3351:
----------------------------------------------
> Therefore, by default, it will try to always load these. In a situation where
> the Store is replaced, or a different Store is used, this may not be
> desirable.
No, that's not a problem. The monitor doesn't just load modules from
modules.properties and use them, it selects the module implementation that is
suitable for the given environment by:
- seeing what the current JDK level is and if a module implementation
supports it
- seeing what classes a module implementation requires and if they exist
- if the module implements ModuleSupportable and if so asking the module if
it can support the current environment.
As an example, modules.properties today contains three JDBC implementations,
JSR169, JDBC 3 and JDBC 4, having multiple exist is not an issue, the monitor
selects the correct one.
> 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.
