ESQL vs ODBC/CLI 
Author Message
 ESQL vs ODBC/CLI

A long-time DBA told me that with Informix, using ODBC adds an extra
layer of connection between your client code and the database server,
thus ESQL is more robust.  I certainly experienced a number of annoying
problems with the Informix ODBC CLI at that time.

My question is whether the same is true for DB2 ODBC/CLI.  Does ODBC add
an extra layer over ESQL?  For the most part, coding in ODBC is
preferred for the reasons given in the DB2 documentation, but there is
no mention of this issue.  If there is a difference in DB2, how is it
affected by platform, client/server OS differences, client/server
location, etc?

Thanks,

Tom Remmers
Software Engineer
Computing and Communications
University of Washington



Sat, 12 Oct 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 ESQL vs ODBC/CLI

Quote:

> A long-time DBA told me that with Informix, using ODBC adds an extra
> layer of connection between your client code and the database server,
> thus ESQL is more robust.  I certainly experienced a number of annoying
> problems with the Informix ODBC CLI at that time.

> My question is whether the same is true for DB2 ODBC/CLI.  Does ODBC add

Yes, if ESQL refers to static SQL.

Quote:

> an extra layer over ESQL?  For the most part, coding in ODBC is
> preferred for the reasons given in the DB2 documentation, but there is
> no mention of this issue.  If there is a difference in DB2, how is it
> affected by platform, client/server OS differences, client/server
> location, etc?

> Thanks,

> Tom Remmers
> Software Engineer
> Computing and Communications
> University of Washington

--


DB2/NT Performance             (416) 448-3438  T/L: 778-3438
IBM SWS Toronto Laboratory
<http://w3.torolab.ibm.com/~garfield/garfield.html>


Sat, 12 Oct 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 ESQL vs ODBC/CLI
Embedded SQL will normally be faster than ODBC in DB2 (as Garfield mentions
below) except that DB2 has two advantages over other databases:

1. DB2 is a newer code base.  Other databases had to graft a call-level
interface that mapped to ODBC over their existing call-level interfaces.
When DB2 was ported to Unix and NT, we were able to write our CLI (and ODBC
driver) using the CLI standard (which closely matches the ODBC de facto
standard).
2. DB2 will cache frequently used plans in memory.  So, if multiple ODBC
users are running the same SQL statements (many ODBC apps do a select * from
syscat.tables, for example) the SQL statement will be compiled, rewritten
for better performance by DB2, optimized,  and have a plan created for the
first user.  All other users will reuse the work done by DB2 for the first
user.

Quote:

> A long-time DBA told me that with Informix, using ODBC adds an extra
> layer of connection between your client code and the database server,
> thus ESQL is more robust.  I certainly experienced a number of annoying
> problems with the Informix ODBC CLI at that time.

> My question is whether the same is true for DB2 ODBC/CLI.  Does ODBC add
> an extra layer over ESQL?  For the most part, coding in ODBC is
> preferred for the reasons given in the DB2 documentation, but there is
> no mention of this issue.  If there is a difference in DB2, how is it
> affected by platform, client/server OS differences, client/server
> location, etc?

> Thanks,

> Tom Remmers
> Software Engineer
> Computing and Communications
> University of Washington



Sat, 12 Oct 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 
 [ 3 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Q: CLI vs ODBC vs ESQL

2. ESQL/C vs. CLI

3. Informix CLI vs Informix ESQL/C

4. ODBC-INTERSOLV vs. CLI

5. Informix-CLI vs. Other ODBC Drivers

6. Informix CLI driver ODBC vs Native Access Help

7. ESQL 5.02 vs. ESQL 7.2

8. ESQL 5.07.UC1 vs ESQL 9.40.UC2

9. ODBC vs: ESQL Round 1

10. Performance of ESQL/C vs ODBC on Solaris

11. ESQL or CLI - which to use

12. Reports vs ESQL vs C-ISAM


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software