Performance of ODBC vs. other access methods -- WEB400

× 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.

Subject: Performance of ODBC vs. other access methods
From: "Dave Odom" <Dave.Odom@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:53:29 -0700
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/web400>
List-help: <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:web400@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

What's the prevailing wisdom backed up by real world experience when
using ODBC from whatever tool or programming language to access DB2/400
or ORACLE versus using some other remote or distributed access method
such as DRDA, calls to stored procedures or API calls?   I've been told
that ODBC is a good performer but have my doubts.

What's your experience show vs Ivory Tower tests?

Thanks in advance,

Dave

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Performance of ODBC vs. other access methods , Nathan Andelin

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.