Re: OLE DB vs ODBC for Oracle

John,
Would you care to share with us your test program to prove your statement:
>>OLE DB (ADO) is 100 time faster.<<

???
I have quite opposite results.

"John Perseo" <dsys-fvbi_at_worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:38EE2692.CDF6347_at_worldnet.att.net...
>
>
> Doug Coan wrote:
> >
> > In article <1eOD4.509$Yd.20460165_at_news1.van.metronet.ca>,
> > "kristina" <kristinah_at_netperform.com> wrote:
> > > I have the simple and quick question for you: which technology is
 quicker in
> > > access to Oracle db--OLE DB and ODBC. I have read a number of articles
 that
> > > OLE DB is better, reliable and quick. But I am just told that ODBC is
 quick
> > > for particularly Oracle. I would like to confirm this from you. Many
> > > thanks.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > We use both and here is what i understand
> >
> > - OLE-DB can be slightly faster for web access if you have e-many
> > e-users (thousands)
> > - We have had a few problems getting all the functions to to work on
> > some versions of Oracle with OLE DB.
> > - Some versions of OLE DB actually sit on top of ODBC
> > - ODBC is well established
> >
> > My 2 cents - Use OLE DB if it works, but using ODBC will probably not
> > impact you in the least. Hard core developers may not agree with me on
> > this however. :-)
>
> ODBC is obsolete. It was designed long ago. OLE DB (ADO) is 100 time
> faster.
> ODBC is also not truely supported by MS anymore.
Received on Sat Apr 08 2000 - 00:00:00 CDT