Thomas Thank you for your quick response. I am using PB layer so JDO is not a worry for now.
> Is this a bug in OJB (count() vs last.getrow())? >>>I can't verify this at the moment...<<<<< This problem occurs when running in a constrained environment. e.g. use the jvm max memory to 128M and execute query on a million row table. Changing jdbc-level to "1.0" in repository_database.xml fixes the problem by forcing the use of count() instead of last.getrow() however it is not a reliable solution. I would be nice to add this to your test cases and have it fixed in 1.0, if possible. -- regards Var George ----------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Mahler Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:22 AM To: 'OJB Users List' Subject: RE: Using Ojb in Applications with large DB tables Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Var George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 8:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Using Ojb in Applications with large DB tables > > > Is this a bug in OJB (count() vs last.getrow())? I can't verify this at the moment... > Also are any known scalability issues in using OBJ against large > tables (say million+ rows)? No, there are no OJB specific problems in working with large tables. Of course you should take care to provide database indexes for all your table accesses. So Using OJB PB, OTM and ODMG APIs will be fine. But using the OJB JDO binding with large tables is currently a no go. SUN's JDORI does not provide any mechanism for index based selection, but relies on a full table scan mechanism. As OJB simply works as a Plugin to the JDORI we can't change this behaviour! This problem will only be cured when we have our own JDO implementation working! cheers, Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
