When you're talking about "read the data", what type of object would you be reading from? If it's a Result generated by one of the tags, then any significant performance hit will already have been taken. In other words, the *potentially* slow and memory intensive part of the SQL tags is in "snapshotting" a ResultSet as a Result. This is really not too different from using something like a disconnected RowSet. If you're talking about reading directly from a ResultSet, then that implies the type of JSP that nightmares are made of ;-).
As an aside, I've done my own micro benchmarking on JSTL's Result vs. BeanUtil's RowSetDynaClass (another way to snapshot a ResultSet). It turned out that Result objects were generated more quickly. I wouldn't necessarily categorize it as a "significant difference", however, and I haven't compared memory consumption. Quoting Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Just guessing, but I doubt it will be faster performance-wise, just faster > to develop. It lets you treat JSP as a scripting language and remove the > compile/deploy stage. > > Hen > > On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Riaan Oberholzer wrote: > > > Is the SQL tags (in JSTL) performance acceptable? > > > > I'm populating tables and was wondering if it would be > > better to read the data in "normal" Java code and then > > populate the table with > > > > <td><%= row.getItem1() %></td> > > <td><%= row.getItem2() %></td> > > > > etc. > > > > I'm not too worried about trying to keep java code out > > of jsp's, I really want the fastest solution if it can > > make a significant difference. -- Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
