«

(Peter) wrote:

>Hi
> Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
>we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
>doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
>
>
>thanks
>from Peter ()
Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
of Java?

The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
database and the development environment based on other criteria.

The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
for multi-platform support.

David Segall <> wrote in message news:<>. ..
> (Peter) wrote:
>
> >Hi
> > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
> >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
> >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
> >
> >
> >thanks
> >from Peter ()
> Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
> of Java?
>
> The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
> accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
> model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
> performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
> language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
> Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
> database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
> Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
> database and the development environment based on other criteria.
>
> The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
> platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
> rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
> was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
> Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
> Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
> single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
> for multi-platform support.

Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
database application in Java.
If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
a database in Java? Does it have market?

thanks
from Peter (

"Peter" <> wrote in message
news: om...
> David Segall <> wrote in message
news:<>. ..
> > (Peter) wrote:
> >
> > >Hi
> > > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
> > >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
> > >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
> > >
> > >
> > >thanks
> > >from Peter ()
> > Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
> > of Java?
> >
> > The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
> > accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
> > model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
> > performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
> > language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
> > Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
> > database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
> > Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
> > database and the development environment based on other criteria.
> >
> > The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
> > platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
> > rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
> > was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
> > Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
> > Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
> > single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
> > for multi-platform support.
>
> Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
> I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
> database application in Java.
> If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
> because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
> a database in Java? Does it have market?
>
> thanks
> from Peter (

I think the earth will continue to spin if you don't develop one in Java.

Peter wrote:
>
> Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
> I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
> database application in Java.
> If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
> because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
> a database in Java? Does it have market?
>
> thanks
> from Peter (

80% slower???
Have you tried that?

It has a market, and it depends on your DB.
(Of course, this won't happen if you've made a DB without any signifiant
improvements and 80% slower than these available ones)

--
Song

More info.:
http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~esubbn/

"Peter" <> wrote in message
news: om...

> If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
> because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%.

Where exactly did you get this information from? Do you have a link to the
website or paper that says this?



l8r, Mike N. Christoff

Yu SONG <> wrote in message news:<c9hhhh$qis$>...
> Peter wrote:
> >
> > Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
> > I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
> > database application in Java.
> > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
> > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
> > a database in Java? Does it have market?
> >
> > thanks
> > from Peter (
>
> 80% slower???
> Have you tried that?
>
> It has a market, and it depends on your DB.
> (Of course, this won't happen if you've made a DB without any signifiant
> improvements and 80% slower than these available ones)

It is hard. Other DB are made in C++. Java is impossible to faster than c++ i think.

thanks
from Peter ()

Peter wrote:
> It is hard. Other DB are made in C++. Java is impossible to
> faster than c++ i think.

It's exactly these statements that suggest to knowledgable people here
that you don't know what you're talking about. Whether Java is slower
than C++ (and by how much) on average, for typical code, is a very
complex question that probably won't ever have a simple answer, but it's
clearly false that "Java is impossible to faster than c++".

After all, there are details of the Java language that permit
optimizations that are not possible in C++, and the VM model allows for
both dynamic optimizations that can be extremely helpful in some
situations and also for more specialized code than can be generated by a
once-only compiler that has to target a whole host of processors in a
family. It's fairly well-established, for example, that CPU-bound
applications with complex floating-point calculations are generally far
faster in Java than C++. Facts just don't fit with your simplified
world-view in which a Java application is always slower than the same
application in C++.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

On 1 Jun 2004 20:27:18 -0700, (Peter) wrote or
quoted :

>It is hard. Other DB are made in C++. Java is impossible to faster than c++ i think.

I don't understand why there are so many SQL engines. There are so
many other interesting projects that have not been tackled even once.

See http://mindprod.com/projects/projects.html

The big advantages of an SQL engine in Java are:

1. it is truly portable. You don't need a separate tweak and separate
install process for each platform.

2. It could potentially run in the same JVM, thus improving the
bandwidth of communication between the SQL and client part.

3. It can be very simply installed, just add a reference to a jar to
the JNLP spec.

One big time waster in SQL is composing queries then parsing them
again and taking apart rows field by field. Data could be delivered in
both directions as preparsed objects. Perhaps someone could come up
with a more Java-esque SQL interface that bypasses all that packing
and unpacking overhead.


--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.

Are there any Java (open source) OODBMS engines?

Roedy Green <look-> wrote:

>I don't understand why there are so many SQL engines. There are so
>many other interesting projects that have not been tackled even once.
>
>See http://mindprod.com/projects/projects.html
>

--
Regards,
Casey

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 07:40:35 GMT, Casey Hawthorne <>
wrote or quoted :

>Are there any Java (open source) OODBMS engines?

There are more SQL engines than you can shake a stick at. Check out
the list at http://mindprod.com/jgloss/sql.html to see which ones are
opensource.


--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.