Subject RE: [IB-Architect] UDF replacement: native shared libraries vs. J ava
Author ENSELME BĂ©ranger
Wouldn't a lightweight scripting engine such as Python be a better choice
for Interbase UDF's ?

Berenger Enselme

> On the point of memory requirements: I would also like to
> point out that
> you are comparing the memory requirements of a development
> environment
> (JBuilder 3 C/S) with the assumed memory requirements of the
> Java runtime
> environment which would be running on the server. These are
> far different
> environments. JBuilder 3 is known to be a memory hog but Java
> runtime is not.
> On the point of speed: Many have already pointed out how CPU
> and cache
> speed have leap ahead of I/O and disk speed. From my view the
> relatively
> small speed degradation in executing byte code is complete
> lost in the cost
> of doing even one disk I/O. For a database server this is
> byte code vs.
> native code difference would usually be insignificant.