I would agree on NIO, but feel compelled to point out there is a well maintained backport of the concurrent stuff whichis tested back to 1.3 at http://backport-jsr166.sourceforge.net/ . And the speedup from ConcurrentHashMap in some situations is considerable (multi-reader case). Likewise for explicit reader/writer locking.
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Alex <[email protected]> wrote: > > Requiring NIO for H2 will most likely break compatibility with a whole > bunch of embedded JVMs that either do not support NIO or have a broken/ > unreliable/slow NIO implementation. > If NIO is introduced it should be a configurable option so that one > could still use a regular IO instead. > > The same goes for requiring Java 1.5 classes like > "java.util.concurrent". This will not play well with embedded JVMs > where many are still at 1.4 API spec. > > My .02 > > > -- C. Schanck --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
