Re: [h2] why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as embedded-mode

thanks all On Wednesday 10 January 2024 at 09:38:59 UTC+8 Andrei Tokar wrote: > Apparently, you assumption about "In-mem should be much faster" is not > correct. > It just makes me wonder, what exactly is the problem at hand? Is that the > disk-based database is too fast? > Or there is an expec

Re: [h2] why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as embedded-mode

Apparently, you assumption about "In-mem should be much faster" is not correct. It just makes me wonder, what exactly is the problem at hand? Is that the disk-based database is too fast? Or there is an expectation of some "ludicrous speed"

Re: [h2] why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as embedded-mode

no, my program use 20 mins keep inserting to H2 (embed + in memory), both speed become stable and nearly the same. On Tuesday 9 January 2024 at 01:30:44 UTC+8 Andreas Reichel wrote: > Because its cached and data are written to disk only eventually when the > cache is full? > > On Mon, 2024-01-0

Re: [h2] why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as embedded-mode

Because its cached and data are written to disk only eventually when the cache is full? On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 09:20 -0800, mche...@gmail.com wrote: > hi. >    why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as > embedded-mode. In-mem should be much faster, right? > > > import java.io.

[h2] why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as embedded-mode

hi. why insert many record to in-memory database is same speed as embedded-mode. In-mem should be much faster, right? import java.io.FileNotFoundException; import java.io.IOException; import java.sql.Connection; import java.sql.DriverManager; import java.sql.PreparedStatement; import java.sql