Hi, H2 synchronizes above the file, so only one thread will ever access it.
> incorporate an existing and well tested > Buffered RandomAccessFile implementation I saw there are some caching RandomAccessFile implementations, but probably they will not help much for H2, because only write buffering is needed, not (read) caching. I think it makes sense to implement something from scratch. > Implementing a buffering system would be good as well. I am not sure > what impact if any it would have on the reliability of the data, (i.e. > would it have more potential for data corruption in case of power > failures, etc?) No, if we implement a 'flush' method. > Generally speaking flash is a lot more efficient at > writing a small number of large blocks than writing a large number of > small blocks. Yes, I know. The same with solid state disks (SSDs). There is a new Intel SSD (not yet available) that should be better at random writes. Regards, Thomas --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
