From: | "Joe Shevland" <shevlandj(at)kpi(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | "'andy'" <andy(at)exkom(dot)co(dot)za>, <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: JAVA vs PERL : PERL wins to postgreSQL |
Date: | 2001-09-03 18:00:07 |
Message-ID: | CDDF6190494B6648934181A2719E72C1019E8507@ausyd0405.au.deloitte.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
> I ran a few bench marks on JAVA writing to a postgreSQL table
> using and
> found that for the same number of records added to the table as a
> similar PERL routine the following results :
> PERL 39 seconds : JAVA 45 Seconds.
> In a similar experiment where PERL and JAVA did treir output to the
> screen and not to a table,
>
> JAVA took 3 seconds and PERL 310 Seconds.
Was that 310 milliseconds in Perl?
> My conclusion is that the database driver to postgreSQL is still far
> from efficient in the JAVA implementation.
One thing that may affect the Java performance when written out to the
screen is the overhead of using System.out.println() calls as these are a
call to native code and synchronized too for multithreaded output.
Maybe if we can pump the test through a profiler and work out where the bulk
of the Java operations are occurring for test 1.
Regards,
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Anders Bengtsson | 2001-09-03 19:34:37 | Re: JAVA vs PERL : PERL wins to postgreSQL |
Previous Message | Rene Pijlman | 2001-09-03 17:48:54 | Re: JAVA vs PERL : PERL wins to postgreSQL |