Re: OO4O
Date: 1995/08/17
Message-ID: <kmajkutDDH7C4.IMB_at_netcom.com>#1/1
In article <191227502wnr_at_unisol.demon.co.uk>,
D:WINSOCKKA9QSPOOLMAIL <mark_at_unisol.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>We've used OO4O in place of direct ODBC xommunications and have found a
>performance drop. What used to take 3-4 seconds now takes 4-6.
>
>It's very easy to program with OO4O from a C++ point of view but VB may
>well be different.
>
>The environments we've tried include Novell and TCP/IP. Performance is
>acceptable and we've decided to continue down this route.
>
>Need any more info ?
What are you asking?
With very small operations, the OLE Automation overhead shows up in
OO4O. Also, remember that OO4O, by default fetches and caches locally
rows that you traverse. ODBC does not do this. Your mileage may
vary and I've seen posts that go both ways(fast/slow), but I think
that you need to be aware that oo4o has a greater overhead up front
that percentage-wise should dimish on larger queries/returns..
>
>Mark :)
>
>--
>Mark Pritchett
>Unisol Ltd
>West Midlands
>United Kingdom
>B76 1GJ
>
Received on Thu Aug 17 1995 - 00:00:00 CEST