[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-393?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12854480#action_12854480
]
Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-393:
-------------------------------------
Hi Eric,
It is hard for me to understand how the patch solves your problem. I think that
you must solve some tricky cross-process locking issues to let a read-only
process meaningfully read a table which is being written by another process. I
don't see how this small patch addresses those issues.
> Allow multiple JVMs to have read-only access to the same directory-based
> database
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-393
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-393
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Store
> Reporter: Trejkaz
> Attachments: readonly.patch
>
>
> For an application I'm building, we needed to permit multiple JVMs to access
> the same database.
> We couldn't easily use a network server configuration, as it would be
> difficult to figure out who to connect to since either user might want to
> view the database while the other database is offline.
> We couldn't just dump all the data in a JAR file, as our databases often end
> up being several gigabytes in size.
> So what we really need is a version of the directory store which is treated
> as if it were read-only.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
