Hi Jörg, On Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM, Jörg Henne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Emmanuel Lecharny schrieb: > > Any other solution in mind ? > not having done any work on the backend makes it impossible for me to > make well-founded comments on the issue. However, the recent discussion > around splay trees and the problems with the current JDBM layer got me > thinking that the requirements of the database layer are almost entirely > identical to those of the RDBMS: > - entries are reasonably similar to tuples > - all indexes are essentially secondary indexes > - DNs are are similar to a primary key, but may also be treated like a > secondary one. > Yes exactly. Also like an RDBMS we will eventually need to have some temp spaces for improving operations on certain search controls like sorting (i.e. building a special index for a specific search). Just some ideas we've been tossing around. > > Some not-so-lateral thinking brings up the question of whether it is > really necessary to invent another wheel. The idea may be totally silly, > and the required effort may easily make the think not worthwhile, but > what about having a look at Derby's store layer: > > http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/StoreLayerLinks > and in particular http://db.apache.org/derby/papers/btree_package.html > Good idea. I did have these conversations a long long time ago with Daniel Debrunner while Derby was still incubating. We found some issues but I think we could still share some code. This is another option for us to consider. Thanks this was an excellent option to point out. Alex
