«

Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit odd
for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to access a
file to get info about the database source than access the same info
from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is used
instead of a File DSN?

I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!

I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be

Thanks,

Arpan

I presume a system DSN is "active" (so to speak) so the application can just
call the details, etc because they are readily available. meaning it won't
have to access the registry thus making faster than a file DSN.

Though this is just my theory!

--
Jon

Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!

"Arpan" <> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
> System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit odd
> for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to access a
> file to get info about the database source than access the same info
> from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is used
> instead of a File DSN?
>
> I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!
>
> I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be
>
> Thanks,
>
> Arpan
>

Actually I'd be interested to read that article from MS because I cannot
find anything that suggest one is faster than the other. Here is an article
that explains the differences and perhaps favours file-DSNs due to there
portability
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...machinedsn.asp

--
Jon

Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!

"Arpan" <> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
> System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit odd
> for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to access a
> file to get info about the database source than access the same info
> from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is used
> instead of a File DSN?
>
> I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!
>
> I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be
>
> Thanks,
>
> Arpan
>

http://www.powerasp.com/content/data...vs_dnsless.asp

http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/070399-1.shtml

http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/063099-1.shtml

http://www.powerasp.com/content/hint...ermissions.asp

http://support.cjwsoft.com/code/moreinfo9-1.htm




"Arpan" <> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
> System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit odd
> for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to access a
> file to get info about the database source than access the same info
> from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is used
> instead of a File DSN?
>
> I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!
>
> I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be
>
> Thanks,
>
> Arpan
>

Arpan wrote:
> Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
> System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit
> odd for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to
> access a file to get info about the database source than access the
> same info from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is
> used instead of a File DSN?

Much of the registry is cached in RAM, so the information is quickly
available.

>
> I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!
>
> I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be
>
> Thanks,
>
Use neither. Use OLE DB instead of ODBC (assuming a native OLE DB provider
is available for your database).

Many of the pages you will find on the MS Support site are in dire need of
revision.

Bob Barrows

--
Microsoft MVP - ASP/ASP.NET
Please reply to the newsgroup. This email account is my spam trap so I
don't check it very often. If you must reply off-line, then remove the
"NO SPAM"

> Many of the pages you will find on the MS Support site are in dire need of
> revision.
>
> Bob Barrows

Well, what the hell are you doing here?? Hop to it!!!

Visit http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;258939 to
read the KB article Jon. It's the very 1st point listed under the topic
'Additional items to consider' in that article.

Thanks to everyone for their input.

Regards,

Arpan

Jon wrote:
> Actually I'd be interested to read that article from MS because I cannot
> find anything that suggest one is faster than the other. Here is an article
> that explains the differences and perhaps favours file-DSNs due to there
> portability
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...machinedsn.asp
>
> --
> Jon
>
> Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!
>
> "Arpan" <> wrote in message
> news: ups.com...
> > Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
> > System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit odd
> > for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to access a
> > file to get info about the database source than access the same info
> > from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is used
> > instead of a File DSN?
> >
> > I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!
> >
> > I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Arpan
> >

Ah hah! Thanks for the link. Interesting read though I'm presuming it only
applies to IIS. I cannot notice much difference on other servers. Though I
may just have not noticed and it may have been. I'll bear the info in mind.

--
Jon

Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!

"Arpan" <> wrote in message
news: oups.com...
> Visit http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;258939 to
> read the KB article Jon. It's the very 1st point listed under the topic
> 'Additional items to consider' in that article.
>
> Thanks to everyone for their input.
>
> Regards,
>
> Arpan
>
> Jon wrote:
>> Actually I'd be interested to read that article from MS because I cannot
>> find anything that suggest one is faster than the other. Here is an
>> article
>> that explains the differences and perhaps favours file-DSNs due to there
>> portability
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...machinedsn.asp
>>
>> --
>> Jon
>>
>> Look at that dead pixel on your screen! *SLAP* Gotcha!
>>
>> "Arpan" <> wrote in message
>> news: ups.com...
>> > Microsoft, in one of its "Help & Support" pages on ADO, says that a
>> > System DSN is three times faster than a File DSN. I find that a bit odd
>> > for the simple reason that won't it be faster for a script to access a
>> > file to get info about the database source than access the same info
>> > from the registry which will be the case if a System DSN is used
>> > instead of a File DSN?
>> >
>> > I very well know that ultimately a DSN-less connection is the best!
>> >
>> > I guess it isn't as simple as I think it out to be
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Arpan
>> >
>