Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.gui > #467
| From | "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Writing a Movie Datab |
| Message-ID | <cu2lo2tsfr3t4p53i5ojebucplegech2sg@4ax.com> (permalink) |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.gui |
| References | <g5udnf01L_AbxxTYnZ2dnUVZ_tGsnZ2d@comcast.com> |
| Date | 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000 |
| Organization | TDS.net |
To: comp.lang.java.gui "Larry Barowski" <MElarrybar-AT-eng_DOT_auburnANOTHERDOTeduEND> wrote: > >"David Segall" <david@address.invalid> wrote in message >news:lbvfo2djiv6kfdlrh3tugcrcgh74jrdiij@4ax.com... >> It is unlikely that one programmer can write code that outperforms the >> code written by teams of open source programmers or those from IBM, >> Oracle or Microsoft. Their code has been subjected to competitive >> benchmark timing tests over many years. > >I don't get your argument here. General purpose database software is >competitive in the sense that it is compared to other general purpose >database software. Not using such software may be orders of magnitude >faster than using it, depending on the purpose. > >> How can from tens to hundreds of lines of Java be simpler than one SQL >> statement and, at most, five template lines of Java to execute it? > >It would be simpler in the project sense rather than the lines-of-code >sense. > >> The database software consists of a couple jar files that must be >> included with the application. Derby requires about 2MB which would >> only be a problem if you were writing software for a microwave oven. > >Those jar files are fairly large though. I work on a medium-sized >(250 KLOC) project which is about a 3 meg download. Adding the >necessary jar files from Derby would slightly more than double the >download size and load on our servers. We have lots of data that is >accessed by single keys only, which is stored in a custom >flat-files+index-files database. For efficiency, the data is organized >and accesses are cached in a very domain-specific way. Using >standard database software would be several times slower at best, >and the difference in speed would be noticeable to users. > I thought I covered your application in my response to your first post which was "Apart from a few read-only applications like the main dictionary of a spell checker what advantage is there in not using a database?" I cannot question your analysis of your own application. However, I think that your advice to the OP who has a standard CRUD application is wrong. There are probably applications that should use their own implementation of java.text but, for the rest of us, a library of optimised, pre-tested code that we don't need to write or maintain is far superior. --- * 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
Back to comp.lang.java.gui | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar
Re: Writing a Movie Datab "Larry Barowski" <larry.barowski@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000
Re: Writing a Movie Datab "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000
Re: Writing a Movie Datab "Larry Barowski" <larry.barowski@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000
Re: Writing a Movie Datab "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000
Re: Writing a Movie Datab "Larry Barowski" <larry.barowski@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000
Re: Writing a Movie Datab "David Segall" <david.segall@THRWHITE.remove-dii-this> - 2011-04-27 15:27 +0000
csiph-web