Oracle Unveils New Open Source BerkeleyDB Release

Mark Brunelli writes to tell us that Oracle has released the newest version of the open source Oracle BerkeleyDB Java Edition. From the article: "The new release of the Java embeddable database is the third to come out in three years and the first new version to come out of Sleepycat Software since Oracle purchased the open source stalwart back in February. Rex Wang, Oracle's vice president of embedded systems and a former vice president of marketing at Sleepycat, said the latest release lets Java developers take advantage of a new Persistence application programming interface (API) that provides greater flexibility and new performance optimizations that enable applications to run faster."

Comments

Sweet!

[AKAImBatman]

I'll have to see if they've finally added support for partial record retrivals. It used to be that this feature was only in the native code edition of BDB. It ended up being a showstopper for the Java version last time I tried to use it.

Re:Sweet!

[greybird]

Hello, this is Mark Hayes, I'm one of the BDB Java Edition developers.

There are no restrictions on accessing partial records in BDB Java Edition -- it is the same as the BDB C Edition in this respect. However, you may have a misunderstanding about the way partial records work in both products: neither product has a BLOB capability.

In both products, when you do a partial get/put of a record, the entire record must be loaded into the BDB cache. The only advantage of a partial get/put is that it reduces the amount of memory copied between the BDB cache and your buffer. If you need the performance of a true BLOB implementation for very large records, I'm afraid you won't get it by using either BDB product.

We do get requests for a true BLOB capability from time to time. We have not implemented it yet, because it will take significant effort to implement it in a way that performs well for very large records. And the number of requests have not yet been high enough to outweigh other requested features.

Please keep the requests for this capability coming in if you need it. We do factor in these requests when we do product planning.

Thanks,
Mark

Alternate link

[Nerdfest]

Since TFA seems to be slashdotted, here's an alternate. I'm assuming that version 3.0 (May 17th) is the new version.

http://www.oracle.com/corporate/press/2006_may/ber keleydb-je-ga.html/

Re:Many using SQLite instead.

[AKAImBatman]

I know that many developers, especially on embedded or hand-held systems, are starting to use SQLite these days instead of BDB. SQLite is small enough, and efficient enough, to be used suitably in such environments. It offers SQL support, which BDB does not.

You're missing the point. Putting aside for the moment that we're discussing the Java version of BDB (which would be useless on the types of embedded platforms you're talking about), BDB is a basic database engine. Which means it's the type of software you can use to build a database management system on top of rather than being a DBMS in its own right. SQLite and HSQL are complete DBMS packages that will only meet your needs if an SQL engine is what you want.

For example, if you're looking to build an Object Storage Database, SQLite and HSQL would both be terrible choices. But BDB would fit the bill perfectly.

Re:Many using SQLite instead.

[ralph alpha]

Berkeley DB and SQLite don't even come close to filling the same niches. Berkeley DB is a highly optimized, generic, low-level tree-based database that can be used for a variety of purposes -- including providing the backing store for an SQL system. SQLite is an embeddable SQL parser wand extremely simplistic backing store. Berkeley DB is like a body without a head. SQLite is like a head without a body (or at least not much of one). You might want to note that "database" does not imply "SQL."

-1, Wrong

[Jerk City Troll]

Java classes get compiled to native code with machine-specific optimizations at runtime. If you had done any research on the subject, you would find that Java out-performs other languages at times. Java is fast. This argument is over, so please can it.

Re:Many using SQLite instead.

[david.given]

SQLite is even starting to take over from MySQL for many smaller websites. The overhead (both in terms of system resources and administration) can't be justified when using a server-based system, especially when SQLite does the job just fine.

SQlite is so incredibly cool (for a database, of course; databases are intrinsically limited in coolness). It's tiny, it's easy to set up, it's portable, it's faster than MySQL for most operations, and it's not just open source, it's actually in the public domain. It doesn't do well if there are multiple processes trying to access the same database, and there's no network layer at all, but given that it stores the entire database in one file, it's the ideal choice for any application that needs to use complex state. I use it for keeping track of email addresses in an SMTP proxy --- it was so easy to use I was amazed.

I'd strongly, strongly recommend having a look if you're writing something that might want a database. Hell, given the command-line front end, you can even use it from shell scripts...

BDB has best performance of all choices

[unPlugged-2.0]

My company has been using Berkeley DB for quite some time and I must say that is indeed quite a good product. Sleepycat has great support and the tool itself is very stable. The java version is fairly new and doesn't have the features of the C version but works great as object storage.

However it is not very user friendly and also not very programmer friendly. It doesn't have any single protocol like JDBC for access because you can literally program it to do anything. Also the documentation is very sparse and there is only one GUI admin tool as opposed to about a jillion ones for SQL DB's. However BDBXMLAdmin from the java.net project is quite good and though its not quite a phpmysql competitor it is adequate https://bdbxmladmin.dev.java.net/. What it makes up in difficulty it absolutely makes up for in terms of raw speed and portability it just can't be beat and we have benchmarked it vs. HSQL and MySQL running in ISAM mode.

It looks like the oracle acquisition may actually be paying off as they were generally very slow in new releases and I don't know about the size of their development team but I would have thought they would have produced more for the time and the apparent caliber of the management team (bunch of Phd's that worked on the initial product). I hope that oracle can bring some muscle and polish to their product and maybe this will be one that they don't kill off with their questionable ideals.

Here's to hoping that BDB gets the recognition it deserves and I predict that with the right involvement it will be a strong player in the embedded applicaitons space, something oracle could never hope to compete in without a tool like this.

We are currently building a product for embedded devices in the RFID space and some of the things that need to be done can't be done with any other embedded db period. It really is so great to work with and handles Java and XML storage quite well.

------- Long time Addict, First Time Poster