Mine either.
-Original Message-
From: Paul Hastings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 2:25 PM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Access OLE DB vs. ODBC
> BTW, here's a link to one of the few sites I found that had any
numbers
> associated with the compariso
> BTW, here's a link to one of the few sites I found that had any numbers
> associated with the comparison for those who are interested.
>
> http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/063099-1.shtml
interesting. all my tests w/cf *never* showed anything that
clear cut.
. http://mysecretbase.com
-
- Original Message -
From: "Andrew Tyrone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 8:46 AM
Subject: RE: Access OLE DB vs. ODBC
I've screamed about
er 02, 2001 12:14 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: Access OLE DB vs. ODBC
I think the whole OLEDB is faster than ODBC argument came out of the ADO
Programmer's Reference book. If you do a web search for any articles
that offer hard number comparisons (I'm using Google
: Andrew Tyrone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:46 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Access OLE DB vs. ODBC
I've screamed about this OLE DB vs. ODBC for almost a year, and no one
ever gives me any concrete answers or benchmarks! There was an article
in CF Developer'
I've screamed about this OLE DB vs. ODBC for almost a year, and no one
ever gives me any concrete answers or benchmarks! There was an article
in CF Developer's Journal a year or so back about how to set up OLE
DB... The author "couldn't disclose the speed differences"
My experience was it either worked very well or not at all. I have one big site that
uses still Access 2k and OLEDB and gives me absolutely no trouble. Works so well I've
been lazy and left it alone for over a year like that.
I wasn't always so lucky. There's one particular weird error that
If memory serves, we tried it here. But, it didn't really help the problem.
We had an access database that was over 50 mb, and the server continually
hung. We found that the only way to get it to stop killing everyone else's
stuff was to move it to a different server. (I know, not what you wanted
You should be able to switch the connection type to OLEDB without any
problem, as long as you don't specify a DBTYPE of "ODBC" in your
tag. It is definitely more stable, although I've found that the latest (2.5
or 2.6) MDAC drivers are fairly stable. We used to have all sorts of
crashes when we
We've got a couple of customers that we host who insist on using Access 97
as their database. One of them has a fairly busy site and a single large
Access database of about 1/2 GB. The CF server that hosts the site becomes
occasionally unresponsive, no doubt due to the use of Access. Migrating
- Original Message -
From: "S R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I've been told in the past that when using CF server and SQL Server to use
OLE DB >instead of ODBC when connecting to databases. I've never been told
why? Is it faster?
I think the rec has to do wit the odbc / MDAC memory leaks - e
Hi,
I've been told in the past that when using CF server and SQL Server to use OLE DB
instead of ODBC when connecting to databases. I've never been told why? Is it faster?
Another thing is they use ODBC where I work to connect to SQL Server databases and are
asking me to create a test so that
set="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
OLE DB vs. ODBC
Has anyone done any benchmarks between the two =
different Database connections layers? I know some things don't =
work through OLE DB but is there a list or any documentation listing =
the advantag
13 matches
Mail list logo
