TimesTen (www.timesten.com) has an in-memory database. They're a spin-off
from HP.
Bob
Doug Kanter <dkanter_at_eznet.net> wrote in message
news:380F58F4.FCB02211_at_eznet.net...
> My question will reflect the fact that my experience is limited to
PC-based
> dbms' (Paradox, Access): OTHER THAN SPEED, why would a user be concerned
with
> when software flushes its info to disk? Why specifically try and find a
system
> which implements its work in memory?
> Doug Kanter
> dkanter_at_eznet.net
>
> CHANGE username to westes wrote:
>
> > I'm looking for vendors who sell a specialized kind of database. I need
the
> > database to be implemented in memory, but with the ability to flush
changes
> > in the database to disk as a background operation. This will be used
to
> > store temporary data that needs to be accessed from multiple machines,
but
> > which by its nature does not require saving to disk *as part of the
> > transaction* that creates the data.
> >
> > Ideally, the database would allow a transaction from a remote client,
write
> > the information to memory, then notify the client that the transaction
is
> > finished. Later, as time allows, the database would flush the
transaction
> > to disk for permanent storage, so it would be available the next time it
> > starts up.
> >
> > Of course we could implement this ourselves, using a write cache layer
on
> > top of a commercial database, but I'm hoping someone already has this
done
> > as a product, or maybe there is an option in some commercial databases
for a
> > table attribute that means something similar to "write-back
transaction".
> >
> > Any pointers or tips are appreciated.
> >
> > --
> > Will
> >
> > NOTE: To reply, CHANGE the username to westes AT uscsw.com
>
>
Received on Mon Nov 15 1999 - 16:00:02 CST
