|
On 2012-08-05, at 1:00 PM, web400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Eh, I'm confused now. I was following Nathan just fine: if you'reThe (slight) overhead would mostly be in the CGI program reformatting the XML packet to match the requirements of the stored procedure.
calling a routine directly from a CGI program then why is it any slower
than calling it via the database service program (the QZDASOINIT program
we know and love)?
You seem to be implying that the CGI program can only access theI'm not implying anything. It is my understanding that this is the way it works. That the CGI job invokes the stored procedure. It does not attempt to go direct to the underlying code. I don't disagree that it would seem that you could skip the stored procedure - you'd have to ask Ranger (Tony Cairns) about that.
underlying XMLSERVICE program through a stored procedure. Nathan seems
to think (and I would agree) that you can skip the stored procedure
entirely and just call the program that the stored procedure calls.
That said - I have not tested personally the comparative speed of the two approaches but I thought Ranger had and that those tests were the basis for the speed warning on the site. The tests themselves may be on the site - I haven't got time to look right now.
Either way - nobody is critiquing the speed of CGI. The comments relate only to the relative performance of the two ways of using XMLSERVICE - period - end of story.
Jon Paris
www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.