Re: ODBC or OLE DB

2001-12-11 Thread Jochem van Dieten
Christopher Dawes wrote: Hello CF-Talk, What's better/faster ODBC/OLE DB. I'm using SQL2k on Win2k. Better: ODBC from a portability point of view, OLE DB from a technical point of view (see faster). Faster: OLE DB. In this case (SQL2K) ODBC is actually a layer on top of OLE DB. That

RE: ODBC or OLE DB

2001-12-11 Thread Craig Dudley
OLEDB seems to be slightly faster under load, nothing much in it though under normal conditions. ODBC drivers can apparantly suffer from memory leaks under certain circumstances. Although I've never really seen any evidence of this using SQL server. OLEDB handles dates and boolean fields

RE: ODBC or OLE DB

2001-12-11 Thread Steve Martin
I'm curious as to what differences you've found as I've used both interchangeably without any problems whatsoever. Could you possibly enumerate the differences for the benefit of the list. Cheers, Steve OLEDB handles dates and boolean fields slightly differently at times (perhaps other data

RE: ODBC or OLE DB

2001-12-11 Thread Craig Dudley
The last problem I had was runnign query a query on a recordset returned via oledb, all the sql BIT fields were coming back as 'Yes' and 'No' as oppossed to 0/1. -Original Message- From: Steve Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 December 2001 14:28 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: ODBC

RE: ODBC or OLE DB

2001-12-11 Thread Steve Martin
Dudley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 December 2001 14:51 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: ODBC or OLE DB The last problem I had was runnign query a query on a recordset returned via oledb, all the sql BIT fields were coming back as 'Yes' and 'No' as oppossed to 0/1. -Original Message