There is no reason why we can't just document both configs and let the user
choose what they want. The pure in memory version seems like the better
default configuration.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 7:55 AM
Subject: [JBoss-dev] hsqldb options


> Prompted by a customer, I did some experiments with hsqldb options.
> 
> Currently we specify a tcp port and require a hsqldb mbean to start the
> hsqldb server.  This opens a port and requires explicit hsqldb shutdown.
> 
> Two other options that appear to work are:
> 
> specify url jdbc:hsqldb:. and remove the hsqldb mbean.  This results in a
> totally in memory db, nothing saved to disk.  IMO this is appropriate for
> most of the testsuite since it eliminates problems with data not being
> cleaned  up between test runs.
> 
> specify url jdbc:hsqldb:somefile and remove the hsqldb mbean.  This results
> in the db saved in a couple of files named like somefile.  No port is
> opened.  No explicit shutdown of hsqldb  seems to be required (although I
> didn't test how much data is actually saved)
> 
> Could someone who knows more about hsqldb  please explain clearly why we
> would want to continue using the setup we  have now rather than one of the
> tcp-port free options?
> 
> Thanks
> david jencks



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
The Definitive IT and Networking Event. Be There!
NetWorld+Interop Las Vegas 2003 -- Register today!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?keyn0001en
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to