You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tomcat.apache.org by Mieke Banderas <mi...@gamebox.net> on 2005/11/28 18:59:15 UTC
Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Given the sad, sad performance findings at:
"No More Apple Mysteries, Part Two"
Date: September 1st, 2005
<http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2520>
are there any javabased DB alternatives, that may perform better than
MySQL (or PostgreSQL for that matter)? I prefer free, open sourced DBs or
otherwise with a license that could fit a small business/non profit
organisation.
I don't enough of JVMs to know if Javabased DBs are usually better
performancewise than MySQL/PostgreSQL, but my thought was that if
everything is kept within the JVM, the weak performance spots in OS X
would be minimized as threads would be handled within JVM rather than
within OS X. Threads being being the prime suspect in the weak MySQL
performance in OS X according Anandtech.
Do you have any thought and/or suggestions on this issue? Experiences you
could share?
My server runs Mac OS X Server 10.2.6 with Java 1.4.1/1.3.1. I can't use
Java 1.5 just yet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Posted by Oded Arbel <od...@m-wise.com>.
On Monday, 28 בNovember 2005 19:59, Mieke Banderas wrote:
> are there any javabased DB alternatives, that may perform better than
> MySQL (or PostgreSQL for that matter)? I prefer free, open sourced
> DBs or otherwise with a license that could fit a small business/non
> profit organisation.
HSQLdb (formerly known as Hypersonic SQL) and Apache Derbi (formerly
knows as cloudscape DB) are two Pure Java databases, which are free and
open source, and at least the first can run "in memory" in the JVM. As
for faster performing ? I think you'd be hard pressed to find something
better performing then MySQL and Postgres. Might want to try firebird,
though I wouldn't get your hopes up.
> I don't enough of JVMs to know if Javabased DBs are usually better
> performancewise than MySQL/PostgreSQL,
I can't really see how it could be, and my experience indeed shows the
opposite.
> but my thought was that if
> everything is kept within the JVM, the weak performance spots in OS X
> would be minimized as threads would be handled within JVM rather than
> within OS X. Threads being being the prime suspect in the weak MySQL
> performance in OS X according Anandtech.
I'm not sure why do they think that, and I haven't read the entire
article yet, but I doubt you'd get better performance from an internal
DB then from a standalone highly optimized full RDBMs.
--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise mobile solutions
oded@m-wise.com
+972-9-9611212 (204)
+972-54-7340014
::..
The marvels of today's modern technology include the development of a
soda can, when discarded will last forever ... and a $7,000 car which
when properly cared for will rust out in two or three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Posted by Oded Arbel <od...@m-wise.com>.
On Monday, 28 בNovember 2005 19:59, Mieke Banderas wrote:
> Given the sad, sad performance findings at:
> "No More Apple Mysteries, Part Two"
> Date: September 1st, 2005
> <http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2520>
> I don't enough of JVMs to know if Javabased DBs are usually better
> performancewise than MySQL/PostgreSQL, but my thought was that if
> everything is kept within the JVM, the weak performance spots in OS X
> would be minimized as threads would be handled within JVM rather than
> within OS X. Threads being being the prime suspect in the weak MySQL
> performance in OS X according Anandtech.
After reading the article I can say two things:
a) I think their take on the thread vs. process creation issue is
completely wrong. They are basically saying "thread creation on linux
is the same as process creation and is very fast, but thread creation
on MAC OSX is not the same as process creation because process creation
also creates a task. Because we tested process creation to be slower on
MAC OSX, we conclude that thread creation is slower." Am I the only one
that see how broken the logic here ?
b) Even assuming they are right, you still want to choose MySQL over JVM
space databases, because Java and Java databases are very much thread
enabled and create and destroy many threads. MySQL OTOH uses very
little threads - essentially it only creates a new thread to handle a
new client, and even then a single thread handles several clients
before another thread is required.
--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise mobile solutions
oded@m-wise.com
+972-9-9611212 (204)
+972-54-7340014
::..
General Failure's Fault. Not Yours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Posted by Stanley Bradbury <St...@gmail.com>.
Mieke Banderas wrote:
>Mike Sabroff suggested:
>
>
>
>>Cloudscape
>>
>>
>is it faster than Apache Derby in your experience?
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>
>
>
The IBM Cloudscape database engine is the Apache Derby database engine
so performance is identical between given versions of each. For more
information on Cloudscape and Derby see the section:
"About the names Derby and Cloudscape" in the document: "Cloudscape
Version 10: A technical overview"
at:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/db2/library/techarticle/dm-0408anderson/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Posted by Mieke Banderas <mi...@gamebox.net>.
Mike Sabroff suggested:
>Cloudscape
is it faster than Apache Derby in your experience?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Posted by Mike Sabroff <mi...@cygnusb2b.com>.
Cloudscape, now owned by IBM is a good choice. It can be run as a
Standalone server or as an imbedded db running within the JVM with your
code. I haven't used it lately, but developed some stuff a few years ago
when Sun use to ship it with the J2EE package.
Richard Schilling wrote:
> You might try a Java Data Objects implementation:
>
> www.objectdb.com
> java.sun.com/products/jdo/index.jsp
>
>
> These are pure object databases, and are reasonably fast. The Sun's
> reference implementation of JDO is not intended for production use but
> it's great as a development toolkit.
>
> Richard Schilling
>
> Mieke Banderas wrote:
>
>> Given the sad, sad performance findings at:
>> "No More Apple Mysteries, Part Two"
>> Date: September 1st, 2005
>> <http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2520>
>>
>> are there any javabased DB alternatives, that may perform better than
>> MySQL (or PostgreSQL for that matter)? I prefer free, open sourced
>> DBs or
>> otherwise with a license that could fit a small business/non profit
>> organisation.
>>
>> I don't enough of JVMs to know if Javabased DBs are usually better
>> performancewise than MySQL/PostgreSQL, but my thought was that if
>> everything is kept within the JVM, the weak performance spots in OS X
>> would be minimized as threads would be handled within JVM rather than
>> within OS X. Threads being being the prime suspect in the weak MySQL
>> performance in OS X according Anandtech.
>>
>> Do you have any thought and/or suggestions on this issue? Experiences
>> you
>> could share?
>> My server runs Mac OS X Server 10.2.6 with Java 1.4.1/1.3.1. I can't use
>> Java 1.5 just yet.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
--
Mike Sabroff
Web Services Developer
mike.sabroff@cygnusb2b.com
920-568-8379
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Java databases as alternative to MySQL on OS X Server? (OT)
Posted by Richard Schilling <sc...@cognitiongroup.biz>.
You might try a Java Data Objects implementation:
www.objectdb.com
java.sun.com/products/jdo/index.jsp
These are pure object databases, and are reasonably fast. The Sun's
reference implementation of JDO is not intended for production use but
it's great as a development toolkit.
Richard Schilling
Mieke Banderas wrote:
> Given the sad, sad performance findings at:
> "No More Apple Mysteries, Part Two"
> Date: September 1st, 2005
> <http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2520>
>
> are there any javabased DB alternatives, that may perform better than
> MySQL (or PostgreSQL for that matter)? I prefer free, open sourced DBs or
> otherwise with a license that could fit a small business/non profit
> organisation.
>
> I don't enough of JVMs to know if Javabased DBs are usually better
> performancewise than MySQL/PostgreSQL, but my thought was that if
> everything is kept within the JVM, the weak performance spots in OS X
> would be minimized as threads would be handled within JVM rather than
> within OS X. Threads being being the prime suspect in the weak MySQL
> performance in OS X according Anandtech.
>
> Do you have any thought and/or suggestions on this issue? Experiences you
> could share?
> My server runs Mac OS X Server 10.2.6 with Java 1.4.1/1.3.1. I can't use
> Java 1.5 just yet.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org