> From what do you draw this conclusion? >From testing!. You might want to do some testing with MS-SQL Server JDBC Type IV(SP1). MS and Data-Direct might have had some licensing deal ***before***...
The MS JDBC SP1 release is a completely different animal. Run some tests, you can find out for yourself. Joe Eugene > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 10:04 PM > To: CF-Server > Subject: RE: database access question > > > > > > MS-SQL Server JDBC Type IV Driver(SP1), think this actually > > > > performs better than Data-Direct. > > > > > > I think the MS driver is licensed from DataDirect, and is > > > essentially the same as what you get with CFMX. > > > > I dont think you are right. You might want to check this. > > http://www.datadirect-technologies.com/products/jdbc/docs/ddsq > > lvsMS-Final.asp > > > > MS-SQL Server JDBC does NOT support SQL-Server 7.0, while > > Data-Direct Drivers does, that perhaps is why CFMX includes > > Data-Direct. > > I've read that before. According to it, the SQL Server JDBC driver from MS > is licensed from DataDirect. Also, according to it, the version that > DataDirect licensed to MS is an older version (JDBC 2.2) while the current > version from DataDirect is newer and presumably better (JDBC 3.0, > SQL Server > 7 support, other goodies). However, beyond SQL Server 7 support, I don't > know if you get any additional functionality from it within CFMX. > > > I havent done any testing but its likely MS JDBC Drivers > > will perform much better than Data-Direct. > > From what do you draw this conclusion? > > > I am not sure if you have noticed, calling multiple queries > > in a sequence in CFMX appears to be slow using SQL-Server > > and CFMX-JDBC(Data-Direct) Connection. > > I haven't noticed this, but there are lots of reasons why this > might occur, > that may have little to do with the database driver itself. For > example, on > some SQL Server implementations I've seen, the ODBC connections were > configured to use Named Pipes rather than TCP/IP, and when CF 5 > applications > were migrated to CFMX, new problems occurred that had more to do with the > network layer than anything else. > > > Can you help to do some performance testing? > > CASE > > 1. CFC(request scope)Data Layer has multiple queries and has > > validation/argument parameters. > > 2. Call queries in CFC (Maybe 3-5 queries, inserts and selects etc) > > 3. Switch JDBC Drivers (MS-SQL Drivers and CFMX Data-Direct) > > to get timing. > > Unfortunately, I'm out of the office for a while, and won't have access to > any useful performance testing environment. But from what little I've read > so far about JDBC, you should expect a wide range of "right" > answers to what > performs best, depending on what your application does, and what the > application's environment is like (network, JVM, etc). > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > http://www.figleaf.com/ > voice: (202) 797-5496 > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body or visit the list page at www.houseoffusion.com
