Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Message-ID: <3E64D6A5.6080009@dff.st>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 17:39:01 +0100
From: Torsten Curdt <tcurdt@dff.st>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: big ESQL performance problem - this one's weird
References: <20030304135522.GA32052@kompuart.pl>
 <36490.10.0.0.1.1046787145.squirrel@ags01.agsoftware.dnsalias.com>
 <20030304150818.GA2943@kompuart.pl>
 <20030304152509.GJ24538@bremen.dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
 <20030304155911.GA7821@kompuart.pl> <3E64CED1.9050004@dff.st>
 <20030304161124.GB7821@kompuart.pl>
In-Reply-To: <20030304161124.GB7821@kompuart.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>>Not weird at all!
>>You are still looping through the ResultSet (row-results)
> 
> Yes but some people in this discussion blamed the amount of SAX events to
> handle for bad performance. So now it is clear that it's the rowset traversal
> that consumes so much CPU, but still why? 

Well, because the traversal means that the JDBC driver transfers all the 
data of the ResultSet over the wire to the application. This happens no 
matter if you use the esql:get-xxx tags or not. (Well, it's all up to 
the driver's implementation. But...)

I bet that's your bottleneck.

 > I'm not skilled in JDBC. The only
> difference I can tell from Squirell SQL client is that it does not use prepared
> statements.

Well, to be really sure you better create a JDBC testcase.
--
Torsten