Explanation/Reference:
Comparing File Stores and JDBC-accessible Stores
The following are some similarities and differences between file stores and JDBC-accessible stores:
* (A) JDBC stores may make it easier to handle failure recovery since the JDBC interface can access the database from any machine on the same network. With the file store, the disk must be shared or migrated.
* The default persistent store can only be a file store. Therefore, a JDBC store cannot be used as a default persistent store.
* Both have the same transaction semantics and guarantees. As with JDBC store writes, file store writes are guaranteed to be persisted to disk and are not simply left in an intermediate (that is, unsafe) cache.
* Both have the same application interface (no difference in application code).
* (not B, not E) All things being equal, file stores generally offer better throughput than a JDBC store.
/If a database is running on high-end hardware with very fast disks, and WebLogic Server is running on slower hardware or with slower disks, then you may get better performance from the JDBC store.
* File stores are generally easier to configure and administer, and do not require that WebLogic subsystems depend on any external component.
* File stores generate no network traffic; whereas, JDBC stores generate network traffic if the database is on a different machine from WebLogic Server.
Reference: Configuring Server Environments for Oracle WebLogic Server 12c, Comparing File Stores and JDBC-accessible Stores