From: | Gunnar R|nning <gunnar(at)candleweb(dot)no> |
---|---|
To: | "Keith L(dot) Musser" <kmusser(at)idisys(dot)com> |
Cc: | "PGSQL-General" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: JDBC performance |
Date: | 2000-09-27 18:07:03 |
Message-ID: | x6k8bxbtfc.fsf@thor.candleweb.no |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Keith L. Musser" <kmusser(at)idisys(dot)com> writes:
> I was hoping the client-side overhead would be less.
>
> (a) Any hints on getting good performance when using JDBC?
Well. I'm usually caching objects on the Java side for frequent queries.
> (b) How much better is the client-side overhead if I were using C
> instead of Java?
Possibly, but I doubt it would do to much. I think the JDBC driver could be
tuned to perform better though. I noticed for instance that the conversion
step from byte to char is taking up considerable time compared to executing
and getting the raw query result. I run the JDBC driver through the
OptimizeIT profiler and found that a lot of the overhead was in the
interpretation of the returned result. ReceiveString and ReceiveTuple where
clear bottlenecks.
> (c) Do many of you use Java to access PGSQL?
Yup. We have been deploying 3 different web applications for our clients
using servlet technology and Java to access PostgreSQL. We are however
using the 7.0.2 release of PostgreSQL.
Regards,
Gunnar
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Wade D. Oberpriller | 2000-09-27 18:07:26 | Increased BLKSZ, but now pgsql seg-faults? |
Previous Message | Travis Bauer | 2000-09-27 16:44:22 | Re: pg_hba.conf |