I was told that Oracle 8.1.6 has improved dramatically in terms
of the performance of SQL statements, even if they are not prepared
statements using bind variables. It somehow manages to still reuse
compiled queries even without the bind variables. Can someone confirm
this?
Frank Sauer
The Technical Resource Connection
Tampa, FL
http://www.trcinc.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tom Larson
> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 3:09 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Does finder support IN clause
>
>
> Not exactly.
>
> However, we've used the TopLink CMP container for WebLogic
> 4.5.1. (Their WLS
> 5.1 product is in beta right now) TopLink does support
> constructing IN()
> clauses from input Vectors -- with one important limitation:
> It doesn't work
> with bind variables. In other words, the desired JDBC SQL
> should look something
> like:
>
> /* ?'s representing bind variables and allowing
> SQL statement reuse at the DB level */
> SELECT ...
> FROM ...
> WHERE columnA in (?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?, ?)
>
> assuming you want SQL statement reuse (and for Oracle at
> least, you do -- trust
> me)
> What TopLink can produce is:
>
> /* hard-coded values for the IN() restriction */
> SELECT ...
> FROM ...
> WHERE columnA in (1, 3, 8, 12, 87, 105)
>
> We managed to work around this limitation by using lots of
> "OR"s. The resulting
> SQL was quite ugly, but much more efficient.
>
> Tom Larson
> Capital One Services, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shiv Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 8:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Does finder support IN clause
>
>
> Hi all
>
> Does any other Application Server provide such a feature? Read on..
>
> I am using Weblogic 5.1 and struggling to write a finder
> method for a CMP bean
> which can use the SQL 'IN' clause. For example, I want
> something like this :-
>
> public Enumeration findByAandBs(A a, B[] b) {
> // this finder should translate to
> // select * from t where t.a = a and t.b IN (b[0], b[1],
> b[2],.... b[n]);
> }
>
> The weblogic WLQL operator list does not include the 'IN'
> operator. Has anyone
> else in this list faced the same problem?
>
> Thanks.
> --
> shiv
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> --
> shiv
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> http://im.yahoo.com
>
> ==============================================================
> =============
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help,
> send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
> ==============================================================
> =============
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help,
> send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
