I'm aware that iBatis supports both input and output maps in the form of
XML documents, but
has anyone here used output result maps directly as web service object
maps?
How does this compare with the use of JDBC's WebRowSet - any comments are
welcome.
Kind regards
Abdullah
Fabrizio Gianneschi wrote:
The Microsoft JDBC driver for SQLServer is ***very*** buggy.
We haven't had any serious performance problems with MS JDBC. Could
this be the nvarchar unicode issue?
it with XSLT?
Larry
On 5/12/05, *Abdullah Kauchali* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to extend the current XML Resultmap format to a new
custom one? Don't ask!, but were are investigating the possibility of
returning XML in Microsoft's ADO format.
Any
IBatis can generate that
already.
--- Abdullah Kauchali [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to extend the current XML Resultmap format to a new
custom one? Don't ask!, but were are investigating the possibility
of
returning XML in Microsoft's ADO format.
Any general advice on this would
Brandon Goodin wrote:
I see. The question here is whether this is a common database issue
and if it should be supported. However, it does not seem to be a
common issue and there are ways to work around this. My other thought
is why do you have over 250+ IN parameters?
My guess: they have a
Is it possible to extend the current XML Resultmap format to a new
custom one? Don't ask!, but were are investigating the possibility of
returning XML in Microsoft's ADO format.
Any general advice on this would be greatly appreciated,
Kind regards
Abdullah
Hi Clinton,
(Thanks for commenting - really appreciated.)
Is your suggestion that we'd rather interface with OSCache directly (and
separately) instead of relying on the integrated iBatis approach? Can
you briefly explain how that would afford us better performance
instead? (To be honest, I'd
Some guesses:
* If you are using transactions, make sure you are commiting/rolling
back the transactions.
* Perhaps connection pool is not working and the number of server
connection hits maximum: check sql server connection property, set
Maximum Allowable Connection to zero (0) = no
Brent Ryan wrote:
For some reason the datasource isn't running the ping command to check
the connections. They seem to be timing out. Is there a setting in SQL
Server that causes connections to timeout?
What version of SQL Server are you using?
Brent Ryan wrote:
* The commiting/rolling back is handled by the datasource automatically.
* The max allowable connection is set to 0
* netstat -n on client and server show 3 connections established.
If I set this property to 0 then it works, but then this means there is
nothing in the pool.
when connecting to MS SQL Server.
Brent Ryan
-Original Message- From: Abdullah Kauchali
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005
11:22 AM To: ibatis-user-java@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: MS
SQL Server 2000 connection reset
Off-topic: But hellova interesting!
(I was reading a thread on TSS the other night about .NET and Java where
Clinton spoke of
being impartial to either frameworks - I quite agree. Here's an article
that depicts some of the
silent thoughts in all of us about .NET... If you enjoy Grimes'
select dbinfo('sqlca.errd1') from TABLENAME
works for me ... the first column of the JDBC resultset will be
the newly inserted value. Fire this immediately after your insert.
HTH,
Abdullah
Clinton Begin wrote:
Okay, you've posted this enough times. We've seen it and have
responded. My
What about relationships from the child up to the parent? Are they also
classified as N+1?
Suppose we have child table with a fk of parent_id.
if I do:
SELECT * from CHILD
I'll get a column with parent_id with values.
Now suppose I also want details pertaining to the parent_id along with
Ok, the flip-side of this approach is that you increase the size of the
returned result by N*(size of the lookup).
So if the lookup is 10 bytes and you are fetching 10 records of the
child, your payload size is 100 bytes
instead of 10 bytes. ( I wonder if JDBC makes some internal
Qualification:
Ok, the flip-side of this approach is that you increase the size of
the returned result by N*(size of the lookup).
Where N = number of records with *unique* parents.
Clinton,
I can see the point when friendlyVU (???) spoke about getting details of
the appropriate parent.
Appropriate being the operative word. (Lazy loading)
In all our database applications, we have *seldom* required the need to
work off a list of
Categories then require to display (use)
Great stuff Clinton.Somehow, I'm surprised. :)
{Shoot!} That should have been: Somehow, I'm *NOT* surprised!.
:(
Abdullah
ps. that's what happens when you work with .NET
18 matches
Mail list logo
