Subject | RE: [Firebird-Java] Re: Class 2 driver modifications have 2x insert performance over pure type 4 for many small inserts. |
---|---|
Author | Ryan Baldwin |
Post date | 2003-03-04T11:54:23Z |
Hi,
I think this is an interesting question. I will ask in ib-Support for some
more details. This might mean that the type 2 driver modifications has more
real world usages then just being able to load the embeded server into your
jvm process. At least until until maybe with new features in JDK 1.4 it is
possible to create pure java versions of these protocols(XNET shared memory
for example).
Thanks
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Roman Rokytskyy <rrokytskyy@...> [mailto:rrokytskyy@...]
Sent: 04 March 2003 11:43
To: Firebird-Java@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Firebird-Java] Re: Class 2 driver modifications have 2x insert
performance over pure type 4 for many small inserts.
kind of IPC that makes localhost connections faster than socket
communication. And sure you can ask that in firebird-devel list, or
even better in IB-Support list, because this is more support
question, not the development.
Roman
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Firebird-Java-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
I think this is an interesting question. I will ask in ib-Support for some
more details. This might mean that the type 2 driver modifications has more
real world usages then just being able to load the embeded server into your
jvm process. At least until until maybe with new features in JDK 1.4 it is
possible to create pure java versions of these protocols(XNET shared memory
for example).
Thanks
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Roman Rokytskyy <rrokytskyy@...> [mailto:rrokytskyy@...]
Sent: 04 March 2003 11:43
To: Firebird-Java@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Firebird-Java] Re: Class 2 driver modifications have 2x insert
performance over pure type 4 for many small inserts.
> I've never been able to find out for sure if this is the case forMaybe I was not correct about shared memory. But anyway they use some
> FB 1.0.0. I've heard mention of an XNET protocol in FB 1.5 which I
> thought did this - but now I wonder if I missunderstood the purpose
> of XNET protocol because I dont see why if it already exists -
> unless this a a cross platform implementation and FB 1.0.0 only has
> shared memory protocol for windows.
kind of IPC that makes localhost connections faster than socket
communication. And sure you can ask that in firebird-devel list, or
even better in IB-Support list, because this is more support
question, not the development.
Roman
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Firebird-Java-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/