Hi I plan to use H2 for caching intermediate results from an analysis, and it's not big deal if data gets occasionally corrupted.
What are my choices for trading reliabilty for efficiency? So far I was using HSQLDB, but I wanted to try H2 as it is said to be faster. Probably I'm doing something wrong, because currently my program runs bit faster with HSQLDB than with H2. When creating HSQLDB database, I issue following extra 2 commands, that are not recognized by H2: SET FILES LOG FALSE; SET DATABASE DEFAULT TABLE TYPE CACHED; Otherwise I'm using same script for creating both H2 and HSQLDB databases. I could reduce speed difference by giving bigger cache for H2 (with default settings, the speed difference between H2 and HSQLDB seemed to be around 30%), but even with bigger cache (twice the size of db file) H2 is still bit slower (about 10%). Aivar. -- 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.
