From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Carlo Stonebanks <stonec(dot)register(at)sympatico(dot)ca>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: Is ODBC that slow? |
Date: | 2006-10-21 16:07:10 |
Message-ID: | 20061021160710.GB24558@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 10/21/06, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> >Try Command Prompt's ODBC driver. Lately it has been measured to be
> >consistently faster than psqlODBC.
> >
> >http://projects.commandprompt.com/public/odbcng
>
> just curious: what was the reasoning to reimplement the protocol stack
> in odbcng? the mainline odbc driver went in the other direction.
Yeah, but they had to back-off from that plan, and AFAIK it only uses
libpq for the auth stuff and then switch to dealing with the protocol
directly.
I don't know what the reasoning was though :-) I guess Joshua would
know. I'm not involved in that project. I only know that recently a
user posted some measurements showing that ODBCng was way slower that
psqlODBC, and it was discovered that it was using v3 Prepare/Bind/
Execute, which was problematic performance-wise due to the planner
issues with that. So AFAIK it currently parses the statements
internally before passing them to the server.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-10-21 16:14:53 | Re: Is ODBC that slow? |
Previous Message | John Philips | 2006-10-21 15:43:05 | Optimizing disk throughput on quad Opteron |