Re: Benchmarks - Java vs PL/SQL

Actually, the "data access advantage" has little to do with this whole subject. What REALLY matters is the SQL written. Lousy SQL sent to the database in 0 nanoseconds is still going to lose to the savvy SQL technician.

Richard Sutherland
rvsutherland_at_yahoo.com

<jdarrah_co_at_my-deja.com> wrote in message news:91vtfc$cfs$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> The artical you mention glosses over one very important point. To
> quote Larry:
> "It was not the goal of these tests to examine any specific data-access
> API or transport which may offer an "data access advantage" to one
> specific language platform over another (e.g. JDK 1.2.2 with a native
> JDBC driver might be able to access the database more efficiently than
> JDK 1.1.7 using an ODBC-bridge)."
>
> The primary purpose of most database applications that I have been
> involved with is to select information from the database, display it to
> a user, and allow that user to manipulate the data. In cases like
> this, the most important performance metric IS the data-access API.
> Larry's performance tests miss the forest for the trees. I have little
> doubt that java can run circles around pl/sql with number crunching and
> string manipulation tasks but that won't really matter if the
> application is spending 99% of the time waiting on the jdbc layer to
> return the data to be crunched.
>
> In article <3A42AAA3.3020009_at_interealm.com>,
> Roby Sherman <rxsherm_at_interealm.com> wrote:
> > Avi Abrami wrote:
> >
> > > I am looking for some performance
> > > measurements/comparisons for stored
> > > procedures in PL/SQL versus stored
> > > procedures in Java.
> > >
> > > We are trying to decide whether it is
> > > better to write our stored procedures
> > > in Java or PL/SQL.
> > >
> > > TIA,
> > > Avi.
> > >
> > >
> > Try http://www.orageeks.com/technotes/larry/languages.html
> >
> > --Roby
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
Received on Fri Dec 22 2000 - 15:27:21 CST