Having talked to lots of Derby users and prospects at conferences and elsewhere, I can only say that such addition / feature / hooks would be quite welcome, indeed.
I'm at least aware of several open source projects (including some from Apache) which would be interested in using Derby's B-Tree implementation for the following reasons: - It is 100% Java - It is mature - It performs well - It is Apache - It has an active community There are also users who have a need for a simpler store (not SQL-based) with a much lower footprint for restricted environments. Yes, they could use other solutions out there but the Apache licensing scheme and community is what bring them here in the first place. On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Rick Hillegas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for the quick response, Bryan. Some comments inline... > > Bryan Pendleton wrote: > >> be useful for applications which just need to put and get data by key >>> value. These would be applications which don't need complex queries or SQL. >>> >> >> Aren't there some pretty good packages for this already? E.g., BDB-JE, >> JDBM, Perst, etc.? >> > Right, there are other open-source offerings in this area. I think that > Derby's feature set, maturity, and attractive license could occupy a unique > spot in this space. > >> >> Speaking totally personally, I'd sure like to see Derby focus on the >> things that make it special: >> - complete and correct JDBC implementation >> - complete and correct SQL implementation >> - low footprint, zero-admin reliable multi-user DBMS >> > Absolutely, Derby should continue to be all of the above. But I think that > a Derby Lite option could help us grow our community. > > Thanks, > -Rick > >> >> thanks, >> >> bryan >> > >
