Re: Native vs. Pure Java (was: Issue with JDBC connection on AS400)

I don't have any performance data, but I too always use the JTOpen library.

I do think for some things the native driver is supposed to be faster
though, but I don't know how much. The JT400Native.jar is optimized for the
i. (Can't remember where I read that, but I did the other day)

Here is a quote from the JDBC FAQ:
"The Native driver runs only on the i5/OS JVM, but performs better than the
Toolbox driver when the data is on the same machine. The Toolbox driver runs
on any JVM (including the JVM shipped with i5/OS). The current general
advice is this: If your program is only intended to run on the i5/OS JVM and
the data is on the same machine, use the Native driver. If your program is
intended to run on other JVMs or the Java program is on one i5/OS system and
the data is on a different i5/OS system, use the Toolbox driver."


James R. Perkins


On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:06, David Gibbs <david@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ashish Kulkarni wrote:

This program works with JT400.jar on AS400, but does not work with
jt400Native.jar on AS400.

Out of curiosity, anyone know of a performance test comparing JTopen &
JT400Native's JDBC access?

Personally, I've always been using the JTopen driver even when running on
the i.

david

--
IBM i on Power -- For when you can't afford to be out of business.
--
This is the Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400 (JAVA400-L)
mailing list
To post a message email: JAVA400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/java400-l
or email: JAVA400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/java400-l.