[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4084?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12680598#action_12680598
]
Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-4084:
-------------------------------------------
My vote goes to "memory" because
1) It's sufficiently easy to type (short and no special characters)
2) It's consistent with the other sub-protocols (they're not named "in-jar" or
"in-classpath")
3) It's sufficiently descriptive (I feel that the proper place to describe this
feature is in the documentation, not in the URL ;)
But I'm fine with any of the alternatives suggested so far.
> Determine the subSubProtocol name for the in-memory back end
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-4084
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4084
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Affects Versions: 10.5.0.0
> Reporter: Kristian Waagan
>
> The community should agree on a name for the subSubProtocol for the in-memory
> back end. The name will be used in the connection URL, and it is the
> mechanism used to tell Derby to use the in-memory back end:
> jdbc:derby:subSubProtocol:dbName
> Two hot candidates are:
> o mem
> o memory
> The former is shorter, the latter is slightly more descriptive. If you have
> opinions on this, please post a comment.
> We should decide on this before we cut the branch for 10.5.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
