Re: OCI vs. Pro*C

In article <1994Jan7.155545.14566_at_drd.com> mark_at_drd.com (Mark.Lawrence) writes:
>Is the 3gl API, OCI, really deprecated by Oracle in favor of Pro*C (the
>embedded SQL pre-compiler)?

Not that I can tell. OCI got some enhancements last time around, so I assume it's alive and well. Besides, an awful lot of people are using it. That doesn't represent policy, just my observation.

>Coming from the sybase environment, 3gl
>is awfully comfortable. Is Pro*C really worth the hassle of going
>through pre-compilation?

Personal taste, really. As one other poster pointed out, OCI does change as enhancements and upgrades are added, so some calls that were documented as current in v5 are no longer available in v7, so maintenence could be more of an issue with OCI. Some things possible w/OCI aren't doable with Pro*, so there may not be a choice. Pro* programs tend to be bigger and consume more machine resources. Pro* certainly does help with portability, and it didn't seem to affect performance much (last time I tested this, Pro* actually was a little faster, but not significantly so).

Dave Criswell
Not speaking for them
dcriswel_at_oracle.com Received on Fri Jan 07 1994 - 22:27:12 CET