[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1876?page=all ]
Daniel John Debrunner updated DERBY-1876:
-----------------------------------------
Attachment: derby1862.java
Modified version of derby1876.java that uses the same basic SQL statement but
with column names and then fetches the data using ResultSet.getInt(String).
Used to show the performance improvement by changes made in DERBY-1862.
Also shows that even with the changes for DERBY-1862, fetching by column name
operates about 60% the performance of fetching by index, with this simple
select case.
> Investigate overhead of JDBC layer and compiled activation code for simple
> embedded read-only, forward ResultSets
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-1876
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1876
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: JDBC, Performance
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: derby1862.java, derby1876.java
>
>
> For simple ResultSet usage like:
> ResultSet rs = ps.executeQuery();
> while (rs.next()) {
> rs.getInt(1);
> rs.getInt(2);
> rs.getInt(3);
> }
> rs.close();
> it would be interesting to see how much overhead could be removed with simple
> changes, or possibly removed if there was a simple ResultSet implementation
> for forward only, read-only ResultSet, and the more complete implementation
> for all other ResultSet types such as updateable and/or scrollable. Has
> introducing updateable ResultSets, for example, degraded the performance of
> read-only ResultSets? Could code be changed so that a typical read-only
> Resultset is not affected by the code required for richer ResultSets?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
