随着Java 6 (代号Mustang) 的发布，JavaDB被集成到JDK中，用户将获得一个完整的关联数据库作为JDK的一部分。然而，对于为何选择JavaDB而非其他更小的数据库如HSQLDB或One$DB，引发了讨论。
news:
Mustang、Dolpin更名JDK6、JDK7
其中 Mustang将自带数据库javaDB
来自TSS上的消息:
David Van Couvering has written that "Java DB is bundled in Mustang," meaning that users who use Java 6 will have a full relational database as part of the JDK (not, it should be noted, the JRE).
However, one has to ask: why JavaDB, instead of the much smaller HSQLDB or One$DB? Considering that derby.jar is 2MB (not including the tools and network client code, which adds another half meg) is it worth it? Is Derby's implementation of SQL - basically a Java port of DB2, for all intents and purposes - the "right one?" Would you rather have seen a more Oracle-like implementation, or perhaps nothing at all?
Mustang、Dolpin更名JDK6、JDK7
其中 Mustang将自带数据库javaDB
来自TSS上的消息:
David Van Couvering has written that "Java DB is bundled in Mustang," meaning that users who use Java 6 will have a full relational database as part of the JDK (not, it should be noted, the JRE).
However, one has to ask: why JavaDB, instead of the much smaller HSQLDB or One$DB? Considering that derby.jar is 2MB (not including the tools and network client code, which adds another half meg) is it worth it? Is Derby's implementation of SQL - basically a Java port of DB2, for all intents and purposes - the "right one?" Would you rather have seen a more Oracle-like implementation, or perhaps nothing at all?
扫一扫
1252
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
