On 04/11/11 17:20, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > 11.04.2011 14:59, Vlad Khorsun wrote: >>> It just don't have enough advantages over old ISC API. >> With this new API many simple programs (like yours, for example) will >> be easy to write and require >> NO additional access layers. > Not quite so. "Easy to write" (for me) means "use well documented API > which has enough > examples of usage". Nothig from this is applied to the new API. > And, BTW, what "additional access layers" you have on mind? Y-valve? > >> New features (do you need longer SQL identifiers ?) also will be implemented >> in new API. > They can be implemented in an old API as well. >
New features are much easier to implement using interfaces. For example, when we try to add namespaces to old XSQLDA (i.e. need to extend that structure), we have a lot of backward compatibility problems. With interfaces this is just one more entry in vtable. >> Call overhead also will be less than with ISC API. > How big performance gain do you expect from it? AFAIK, CPU time wasted in > old API > serialization is microscopic in comparison with network or disk interaction > time. For each API call we currently have to perform search in the tree - due to need to keep handles 32-bit. Not to say it's awful, but not microscopic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. And it wants your games. http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
