Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!novia!news-out.readnews.com!transit3.readnews.com!news-out.news.tds.net!newsreading01.news.tds.net!86597e80!not-for-mail From: "Lew" Subject: Re: LDBC driver Message-ID: X-Comment-To: comp.lang.java.databases Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.databases In-Reply-To: <53815f8b-1c28-43e3-937f-2e9c75242705@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.co References: <53815f8b-1c28-43e3-937f-2e9c75242705@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.co Content-Type: text/plain; charset=IBM437 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Gateway: time.synchro.net [Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92] Lines: 41 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:22:06 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 96.60.20.240 X-Complaints-To: news@tds.net X-Trace: newsreading01.news.tds.net 1303917726 96.60.20.240 (Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:22:06 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:22:06 CDT Organization: TDS.net Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.databases:161 To: comp.lang.java.databases blueparty wrote: > http://ldbc.sourceforge.net/ > > Any experiences, opinions, anything to share ? I don't see the advantage over JDBC. They say that with JDBC, > # The SQL is different for each databases > # Every JDBC driver behaves differently > # Changes are required for each database > # No time to study all vendor documentation > # No time to test with all databases However, with JDBC, and especially with JPA, much of the difference between vendors is already abstracted. Also, most products are designed to work with a single database engine; not as many are meant to plug into virtually any RDBMS, and those tend to be written with a generic SQL dialect in the first place. Where RDBMSes differ the most is in DDL, which is generally outside the scope of the Java program and not such an issue there. With modern data layers like Hibernate and other JPA solutions, the differences the program does care about are moved off into deployment descriptors. These guys achieve their "independence" by using the same restricted dialect of SQL as you'd use without LDBC if you were to try to be portable. I can see a niche for it in those few products that are meant to plug into any database, maybe. But for my own work, no thank you. I'll stick with the standard approaches. Last thing I need in my alphabet soup is yet one more layer to go wrong on top of the gazillion layers of abstraction already in place. -- Lew --- * Synchronet * The Whitehouse BBS --- whitehouse.hulds.com --- check it out free usenet! --- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.92 Time Warp of the Future BBS - telnet://time.synchro.net:24