Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




VB6 - Using ADODB.RECORDSET(s) - Efficiency?

How efficient, in all senses of that word, viz. Coding Time, Effort, Speed,  Data Manipulation, Code Maintenance, etc., is it use an ADO Recordset as the default Data Type to handle N-Dimensional Arrays, irrespective of whether there is an actual DB that needs to updated or not?

Regards

KayJay

Indian Developer in India
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

why don't you write a small test app to figure it out?


Wednesday, March 03, 2004

My grandpappy always told me "the right tool for the right job". Generally considered profound words of wisdom.

To answer your question: It depends. What's the job you're trying to accomplish?

Sgt. Sausage
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

Mr. A Y Mous, It's being done, thanks. No harm in finding out from others, anyway, is there? If so, my most sincere apologies.

Sgt. Sausage, I am trying to avoid building complex classes to be passed around the app. and then looping through a collection of such classes,  to retrieve specific data. Since the current app does require those classes to be persisted in a database, it's not too much of an issue now, but it may in the future, as some sections of the data collected may not be persisted in the Dbase after some extensive number crunching. Hence my requring a common data type.

The whole thing cropped up because one cannot have publicly exposed UDTs in a private class. Else returning an array of such an UDT would have been more than sufficient for my needs.

Regards

KayJay

Inidan Developer in India
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

Oh! and the number of records will be relatively small. Say 100 records of around 25 fields each.

Inidan Developer in India
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

I understand your predicament in feeling hapless about not being able to pass UDTs to procs.

<PLUG>I had the same issue more than once in the past, and everytime I stumbled, I resolved it, and then forgot how I'd resolved it.
http://www.google.co.in/search?q=%22Passing+UDTs+to+procs%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&meta=
</PLUG>

Getting back to the subject, I believe your problem would be better described as that of *choosing amoung data persistent techniques*. While our clan is not given the previlige of OLE Structure Storage, of which I have almost no idea except how the technique works, we have the following left:

(1) Persist to an XML or ADTG (ADO Table Datagram) file. It's as simple as rs.Save FileName, OptionOrFileFormat and Philo's your uncle :=)

(2) Registry - C'mon! You don't want that I know. So outruled.

(3) Go for INI. Not a neat solution. No security.

(4) Create your own Markup.

Given the options, I think the only choice you'll have left with is ADO. While .adtg files will be binary, XML will be text-stream based. I have used both under different circumstances without profiling the performances. So which one you'd choose would depend upon a cosmetic choice: text or binary.

Sathyaish Chakravarthy
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

Thanks for the info., Satyaish. Am exploring all possiblilities. Will decide soon.

BTW, www.custom-code-factory.com returns "host not  found".

Regards

KayJay

Indian Developer in India
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

Yup! the guy who owned it for several years, Bootie, was discouraged by the dwindling number of visitors and so he dropped the account this February 2004.

I was just showing off with that plug actually. :=P

Sathyaish Chakravarthy
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

As one obsessed with closure....

Decided to use Recordsets. Have chosen flexibility and ease over size/speed and  "correctness" (should there be something like that). Speed penalty is close to 30% for a data set of 1000 elements. IMO, a fair price as far as this app. is concerned.

Regards

KayJay

Indian Developer in India
Wednesday, March 03, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home