Re: How to do a local connection with JDBC ?

Hi from Paris

are you sure the ORACLE_SID variable is the same you oppened the instance ???

"jodetek" <jodetek_at_free.fr> a écrit dans le message de news: 41e84af0$0$31518$626a14ce_at_news.free.fr...
> Hi,
>
> I'm using IBM AIX 4.3.3 ML11 (3 Bits), with IBM's Java 1.3.0
> Oracle 8.1.7.4 and the Oracle JDBC driver classes12.zip
>
> When I perform the following connection:
>
> DriverManager.registerDriver( new oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleDriver() );
> conn = DriverManager.getConnection (
> "jdbc:oracle:oci8:arkernel/arkernel_at_ARDEV1");
>
> Then, the oracle process created for my batch is not in local and
> therefore
> uses SQL*Net.
>
> ARDEV1-../jdbc/sample> ps auxww | grep oracle | grep ARDEV1
> oracle 45908 0.0 1.0 28480 14244 - A 19:26:41 0:00 oracleARDEV1 (LOCAL=NO)
>
>
> It's not good for performance
>
> Now, If I perform the following connection:
>
> DriverManager.registerDriver( new oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleDriver() );
> conn = DriverManager.getConnection (
> "jdbc:oracle:oci8:arkernel/arkernel@");
>
>
> (nothing after the @, as it is shown in the Oracle documentation)
>
> The connection used the $ORACLE_SID environment variable and the session
> is
> local and that is much better for the performance.
>
>
> jdelfoss 28644 0.0 1.0 28480 14284 - A 19:24:31 0:00 oracleARDEV1
> (DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=YES)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=beq)
> ))
>
>
>
>
> Now come the problem...
>
>
> I run exactly the same program with IBM's Java 1.3.1 (instead of 1.3.0)
> (and
> nothing after the @ to be in local)
>
> I got the following error
>
> exception: ORA-01034: ORACLE not available
> ORA-27123: unable to attach to shared memory segment
> IBM AIX RISC System/6000 Error: 22: Invalid argument
>
> while the same connection is working with sqlplus and the database is
> running. Is it a bug ?
>
> With Java 1.3.1, it's only working using SQL*Net (@ARDEV1)
>
> Here is the question: What is the correct way to connect to a database in
> local (the java batch is running on the same server than the database) ?
> We
> don't want to use SQL*Net !
>
>
>
> Thanks for any help
>
> JD
>
>
>
Received on Fri Jan 14 2005 - 16:53:15 CST