On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:40, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > And I'm not yet 100% convinced of Derby vs H2. > > H2 is a potential contender I think too. > > Would need some pros/cons of each.
IMO all we need to know is if javadb is enough for this distribution which again never targeted heavy performance production. > > -Vincent > > On May 20, 2011, at 11:39 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: > >> Also I think I'd prefer using the latest version from derby rather than the >> repackaged version by Oracle... >> >> -Vincent >> >> On May 20, 2011, at 11:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: >> >>> >>> On May 20, 2011, at 11:29 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>> >>>> Hi devs, >>>> >>>> Since we are now depending on java 6 I think we should probably change >>>> our default all in one distribution to be based on javadb. >>>> >>>> I'm not going to do any quality comparison between javadb and hsqldb >>>> and this package is not supposed to be used in production anyway, the >>>> only thing I'm interested in here is: javadb is embedded in java 6 so >>>> using it instead of hdsqldb mean one jar less for the exact same >>>> features. >>>> >>>> WDYT ? >>> >>> I'm not 100% sure. Is javadb available in all JDKs? Isn't it only avail in >>> the Oracle JDK? >>> >>> Also is it avail in the JRE? >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
