Re: PLSQL versus OCI versus JDBC

"Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com> wrote in message news:MI2Ia.21436$vq.2953_at_sccrnsc04...
>
>
> Actually, in 9i you can compile the pl/sql into native C code.
> Jim
>

Jim,

Agreed. But even without that I bet my PL/SQL routine will outperform his C++ by a factor of 10. And it will handle the exceptions better. In any case (and sorry if this offends some), quite frankly I don't give a damn whether we can compile to native or not, since 99.9% of the work we do is inserting/updating/deleting rows of data in the database, rather than being computationally intensive.

And anyway, if OP wants only to <quote> "synchronize" between two different database schemas (different structurally but semantically equivalent so that a mapping can be defined) <end quote>, Oracle has provided most of it already in the box. Fast snapshots + triggers + transformations may well be the best solution here.

And lastly, please accept my apologies for being irritable. Some idiots produced just such a system in a project I've been working with for the last year and a half at work. Some joker decided that the best way to replicate between two Oracle 8.1.7.4 databases was to produce a VB interface to encode a 'send' message in XML, and another to decode said XML into a set of inserts/updates in the target database.
This is *not* a public schema; it is internal; proprietary; one-to-one. It could have been made to work with a few man-days effort. Instead it has taken hundreds of thousands of pounds to get it limping along; which it now is.
So, was the lesson learned?
Apparently not; the next time the same question was posed, the same solution was chosen.

Bitter? Moi?

Regards,
Paul Received on Wed Jun 18 2003 - 15:54:24 CDT