Re: java stored procedures fast, but slow when called as SQL function

Galen Boyer <galenboyer_at_hotpop.com> writes:

> On 08 Apr 2003, pete_at_mynix.org wrote:
>
> > The only problem, as I think I have measured, is the binding between
> > the SQL engine and PL/SQL. Currently it seems like SQL is tighly bound
> > to PL/SQL, and Java is wrapped into PL/SQL (see the way that Java
> > Stored Procedures must be declared with "language java" in PL/SQL).
>
> But Java's datatypes are java's datatypes. What you are saying is that
> Oracle should rewrite the internals of its storage structure so there
> won't be any need for a conversion to java's datatypes. It can tightly
> couple PL/SQL with SQL cause they are both Oracle's.
>

I do not agree.

1. PL/SQL has datatypes that do not exist in SQL as well
2. SQL's datatypes such as number(5,3), varchar2(20), nested tables etc have generic Java mappings, which are not as good a match as PL/SQL's. However, Oracls JDBC drivers already provide alternative mappings to own types; in package oracle.sql.* we have types such as STRUCT, REF, BLOB, NUMBER etc.

Since Oracle claims it wrote the JDK basic classes (I assume this should include the Oracle specific JDBC classes/types as well) in native code, I do not see why they should not be able to get the same level of coupling between Java and SQL. Received on Wed Apr 09 2003 - 08:47:05 CDT