Re: S.O.D.A. database Query API - call for comments

In article <9crgsr$4ae$07$1_at_news.t-online.com>, "Carl Rosenberger" <carl_at_db4o.com> wrote:
>JDBC and ODBC overhead adds to the unnecessary performance leak.
>
>As you would expect, a database that is capable of understanding objects
>directly has an insert performance which is 10 ^ 1 to 10 ^2 better.
>http://www.db4o.com/db4o/benchmarks.html

I don't want to go into the business of arguing against the database paradigm you have chosen for your product. I am sure your concept will work fine for some applications, just as SQL-databases works well for others.

But, I have read some of the code of your benchmark and noticed that you have chosen to dynamically build _each_ SQL-statement and use JDBC-Statement objects for executing them. This is (just as you say) expensive. I would guess that a typical SQL-database will spend 90% of its time compiling and generating query plans for your statements.

The idea of SQL to provide a generic, dynamic and easy to understand way of manipulating databases. SQL-statements *can* be compiled and executed dynamically, just as you do in your benchmark, but the preferred way is to compile the statements in advance using parameter markers and execute them multiple times.

Compare this to your object oriented database approach. When you have compiled your java database program, all possible database operations are set and defined at compile time. You will never dynamically construct and compile Java code!

<9c4urh$2th$04$1_at_news.t-online.com> <3aed95c3.2449351_at_news.gte.net> <9ckc 1t$90k$03$1_at_news.t-online.com> <3af04b7f.8148456_at_news.gte.net> <9cq0jp$v dg$04$1_at_news.t-online.com> <R_0I6.7698$SZ5.631147_at_www.newsranger.com> <9cq8et$t you are conceptually only using static SQL?

-
Robert Sundström, Mimer SQL Development
Upright Database Technology AB, http://www.mimer.com Received on Fri May 04 2001 - 14:34:22 CEST