RE: JDBC v. native drivers

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Joe Sam Shirah
>
> I completely agree with Chris.  Most of the "JDBC is slow" stuff comes
> from not using SQL, indexes and so on properly.

I also concur.  If your application is designed to allow SQL to run
properly, JDBC should work just as well.  I am one of the most vocal JDBC
critics around, but I will always modify that stance with two conditions:

1. I don't like JDBC for navigational database access: the type of stuff
done during order entry or other intense business logic, where the path of
execution changes drastically based on external conditions.  SQL is not
meant to be a programming language; even the designers of SQL will say that.

2. I don't like client-side JDBC, because it requires knowledge of table and
column names.  This raises deployment issues that make it very difficult to
change your database schema without having to touch every client.

However, for set-based queries or updates, or even for client-side ad hoc
queries (you can design around most of the deployment issues by using
metadata if you're careful), JDBC is a powerful tool.  OpsNav is an
excellent way to help you get through design issues... heck, it's slowly
converting even an old DB2 fossil like me <grin>.

Joe