× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Just curious. It was even that slow using the new 64-bit JVM running in PASE
or that running the Classic JVM?

The new JVM is supposed to be so much faster.


On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Bruce Jin <brucej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

Our past experience seemed to suggest that Java stored procedures
implemented on AS400 could be very slow compared with SQL/RPG/CL
procedures.
Our tests showed that it could be 10 – 50 times slower. We did tests on
tables with a few dozen records to a few dozen million records. Tested on
V6R1.

It would be interesting to know if this is true on your box.

Bruce
--
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.



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.