jSuneido uses ByteBuffer's to memory map the database file, but they're not ideal for this. Unfortunately, they're the only option.
Java NIO Buffer's are meant to be used in a very particular way with methods like mark, reset, flip, clear, and rewind. For the purpose they are designed for, I'm sure they work well.
But I'm not sure that shoehorning the memory mapping interface into ByteBuffer was the best design choice.
jSuneido memory maps the database file in big chunks (e.g. 4mb). When you want access to a particular record it returns a new ByteBuffer that is a "slice" of the memory map one. This is the closest I can get to cSuneido returning a pointer. The problem is that slice doesn't take any arguments - you have to set the position and limit of the buffer first. Which means the operation isn't thread safe because a concurrent operation could also be modifying the position and limit.
Most operations on buffers have both "relative" (using the current position) and "absolute" (passing the position as an argument) versions. For some reason slice doesn't have an absolute version.
Another operation that is missing an absolute version is get(byte) so again you have to mess with the buffer's current position, meaning concurrency issues.
It would have been much better (IMO) if ByteBuffer was immutable (i.e. all absolute operations). All the position/mark/limit reset/clear/flip stuff should have been in a separate class that wrapped the base immutable version. But not only does the current design force you to drag along a bunch of extra baggage, but it also (for some unknown reason) omits key operations that would let you use it as immutable.
Considering that one of the goals of java.nio was concurrency, it seems strange that they picked a design that is so unfriendly to it.