Hi :) I think Noel (& Marion)'s good experience of H2 being sooo much better than Base is purely down to them moving away from the internal back-end in Base. The version of HsqlDb mentioned by Noel is the 1.8 which Andreas identified as being the version used as the internal back-end in Base.
People using HsqlDb as an external back-end would have been pushed into upgrading many times in the last decade or so. Not upgrading would have been a lot like sticking with Win98. So i believe it was the move to a more modern version of a database program that gave Noel the fantastic improvements he experienced. Java-based back-ends do have a reputation for being much faster for the relatively small databases that most of us probably use. The one with 1 billion records might well find that moving to something heftier such as Postgresql or MySql/MariaDb does the trick. Although there might be some performance advantages to moving from the heftier back-ends to the smaller&faster ones there are several disadvantages around doing the move. Internet facing Servers using LAMP or WAMP and web-hosting companies tend to already have MySql/MariaDb (hence the M i think) so it'd be a bit like installing a different Office Suite for each document rather than trying to stick with just 1 or 2. Regards from Tom :) On 4 March 2015 at 08:53, Heinrich Stöllinger <hc.stoellin...@aon.at> wrote: > Hello Noel, > Interesting! I will have a look at H2. The only issue for me at the moment > is that my provider has not got it installed and therefore I cannot use it. > Regards from Salzburg > Heinz > > Marion & Noel Lodge schrieb: > > Hi Heinrich, >> >> I've been reluctant to join this discussion, but you comment about the >> need >> to have "... a stable, scalable interface to REAL databases (with >> sometimes >> millions of DB-tuples) ...", has prompted me to say that I believe one >> such >> database already exists - it is called H2. See - >> http://www.h2database.com/html/main.html. >> >> Some will perhaps reject it out of hand, because it is Java based. >> However >> it has a vibrant user base and from comments on the user group, some are >> using H2 for very large databases. A year or so ago one user was >> complaining that H2 was slowing down after his application passed the 1 >> billion record mark! In reply, he received several suggestions as to how >> he might over come his problem. >> >> I have migrated 6 databases from HSQL 1.8, (the largest having nearly >> 35,000 records - which I realise, is still quite small), but I have found >> that H2 works well for me. There was a bit of work involved with the >> migration, but H2 tables can be designed in LibreOffice and the process >> went pretty smoothly. Perhaps the only drawback is that once tables have >> been designed, they can be altered only using SQL commands. But I guess >> most users who want an industrial strength database, would already be >> literate in SQL. >> >> My 2c worth, >> >> Noel >> -- >> Noel Lodge >> lodg...@gmail.com >> >> On 4 March 2015 at 05:56, Heinrich Stöllinger <hc.stoellin...@aon.at> >> wrote: >> >> Hello, >>> I am an "old" DB-User in the real sense of the word (I am over 70!). >>> In the 90ies I got into DB2 as a systems engineer at IBM. Then, around >>> the turn of the millenium, I set up a database for the administration of >>> a >>> 50-piece wind band, using Lotus-Approach (DBase...). It was fine >>> but I wanted to go "Open Software" and - when stumbling onto >>> StarOffice/OpenOffice and Base - it was clear to me to go for that >>> "scene". Since then I have been using MySQL as external back-end >>> and must say I am more than happy with it. My DB consists of some >>> 80 interconnected tables/views with record numbers up to around >>> 40.000. This is handled perfectly fine by MySQL (maybe MariaDB in the >>> near future!). >>> Of course - as an "old" DB-guy I have no qualms about using the >>> command-line mysql client directly for doing things like defining >>> DBs, tables, views, foreign keys etc. Therefore, if there are any >>> limitations >>> in the LO-front end, it is o.k. for me. >>> I do feel strongly though, that if we ever want LO to become a REALLY >>> important player (especially within the business world!), a stable, >>> scalable >>> interface to REAL databases (with sometimes millions of DB-tuples) will >>> have to be implemented. Internal, integrated backends are o.k. for >>> playing around but NOT for mission-critical, large-scale operations. >>> Regards >>> Heinz >>> >>> >>> Tom Davies schrieb: >>> >>> Hi :) >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> One advantage of Base is that it can connect to such a wide range of >>>> other >>>> database programs. It is kinda the default way of using Base. MS >>>> Access >>>> can be twisted into using an external database but it's not as easy to >>>> set-up that way as Base. >>>> >>>> Kexi and other front-ends can be used either alongside Base or on other >>>> systems by other users to use the same external back-end as the Base >>>> users >>>> connect to. Again this "playing well with others" is a huge advantage >>>> that >>>> Access doesn't have by default. >>>> >>>> >>>> Sadly the marketing team, if and when they ever mention Base, focus on >>>> using the internal back-end and never even mention the advantages that >>>> Base >>>> has. This could be one reason why we see so many people using the >>>> internal >>>> back-end and comparing it negatively against Access. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately the marketing team took such strong offence to my >>>> objections >>>> to their attempts to market Base on it's weakest points instead of it's >>>> strength that they banned me from posting to their mailing list at all. >>>> Sometimes i am really not a "people person"! >>>> >>>> >>>> I think if we do mention specific back-ends, especially if they are >>>> owned >>>> by Oracle, then it is well worth pointing out other names. It's not >>>> about >>>> fanboyism, just about showing there are a wide range of choices - and >>>> that >>>> people might well already have a database (or even spreadsheet) that can >>>> be >>>> used without any export-import conversions. It is VERY good to know >>>> that >>>> use of internal back-end can be externalised fairly easily without >>>> having >>>> to go through all the troubles Ian Whitfield went through. On the other >>>> hand his move away from Java-based back-ends probably gave additional >>>> benefits! >>>> >>>> >>>> I definitely appreciate Andreas' posts in this thread! He has >>>> cleared-up >>>> several mysteries by explaining the problems "under the bonnet". It has >>>> also been good to see experienced and knowledgeable people giving >>>> anecdotal >>>> confirmation of Andreas' points. >>>> >>>> In answer to Jay's question there was some attempt to move to using >>>> "Firebird" rather than "HSqlDb" but i think that is still an >>>> "experimental >>>> feature" and that we now effectively have a choice of 2 internal >>>> back-ends >>>> neither of which work entirely as hoped for yet. With Firebird it feels >>>> like it is "on the way" though. >>>> Regards from >>>> Tom :) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2 March 2015 at 21:09, Andreas Säger <ville...@t-online.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> Am 02.03.2015 um 21:23 schrieb Tom Davies: >>>> >>>>> Hi :) >>>>>> Apparently another great database program to use as a back-end is >>>>>> Postgresql. Some of the Postgresql people worked with the LibreOffice >>>>>> people to make a really good connector and then got that connector >>>>>> into >>>>>> LibreOffice main trunk. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is not a matter of partisanship, fanboyism nor objective >>>>>> evidence >>>>>> >>>>> of the better product. The important thing is that you are able to >>>>> connect to whatever you already have. The database of your online shop, >>>>> your business software, your accounting software, some dBase directory, >>>>> spreadsheets or csv files. The connectivity feature lets you use >>>>> tabular >>>>> data without troublesome export/import. >>>>> >>>>> If all you have is an embedded HSQLDB, you can convert this to HSQL 2 >>>>> within minutes. Conversion into Postrgre/MySQL/whatever would require >>>>> careful editing of SQL scripts, testing and possibly adjustment of >>>>> queries, forms, reports. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >>>>> Problems? >>>>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >>>>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ >>>>> Netiquette >>>>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >>>>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be >>>>> deleted >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >>> Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to- >>> unsubscribe/ >>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be >>> deleted >>> >>> > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org > Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to- > unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be > deleted > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
