Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-05-06 Thread Thomas Mueller
Hi, > I checked the documentation and I can't find a place where we explain that. I'm not sure if you talk about the auto-server mode or the in-memory database. Auto-server mode: http://h2database.com/html/features.html#auto_mixed_mode (I will try to extend the documentation to be more clear, it

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-29 Thread Noel Grandin
Thomas, I checked the documentation and I can't find a place where we explain that. I can see how to start a TCP server that uses a disk-based database, but I can't see how to start a TCP server that uses a memory database. -- Noel. Thomas Mueller wrote: > Hi, > > Currently, the auto-server mo

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-29 Thread Thomas Mueller
Hi, Currently, the auto-server mode works as follows: - the first application that opens the database writes its ip address and port into the .lock.db file - the second application will detect this and connect to this ip address and port The auto-server mode is useful if multiple processes use th

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-29 Thread Noel Grandin
The docs aren't clear about this use-case, I think we'll need to wait for Thomas to weigh in. See here: http://www.h2database.com/html/features.html#in_memory_databases This seems to indicate that the first process should start the in-memory database using a URL like this jdbc:h2:mem:db1 And t

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-29 Thread Xavier
ok, the lock file contains a random key to be read by clients to be sure they only access that particular DB through the server... But, in my case, I don't really care. To be more precise, I don't care if *any* in-memory database can be accessed remotely. I would just like to be able to open a con

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-29 Thread Maaartin G
On Friday, April 29, 2011 8:18:34 AM UTC+2, Xavier wrote: > > I don't understand your answer, I would have expected a connection to > jdbc:h2:mem:test;DB_CLOSE_DELAY=-1&AUTO_SERVER=TRUE to behave like > this code (which does not prevent any process to terminate): > Server would be started on fir

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-28 Thread Xavier
I don't understand your answer, I would have expected a connection to jdbc:h2:mem:test;DB_CLOSE_DELAY=-1&AUTO_SERVER=TRUE to behave like this code (which does not prevent any process to terminate): public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { Server.main("-tcp", "-tcpAllowOthers"

Re: Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-28 Thread Maaartin G
1. What you propose would prevent the first process from termination, which is bad. 2. Actually, the server gets started as demon thread, so it doesn't prevent the app from terminating. When the app finishes, the server is gone. This way all the data is gone, too. 3. There's a ".lock.db" file

Why isn't it possible to AUTO_SERVER an in-memory database

2011-04-28 Thread Xavier
Hi, for my own understanding, could someone briefly explain why it is not possible to automatically start a server for an in-memory database (jdbc:h2:mem:test;DB_CLOSE_DELAY=-1&AUTO_SERVER=TRUE) ? Is it for technical / security / performance / other reasons ? I'm just curious because it does not