[AccessD] SQL vs DAO -- rattling cages

Actually, we're talking about SQL DDL as opposed to manipulating objects
with DAO or ADO.

Charlotte Foust

-----Original Message-----
From: Francisco H Tapia [mailto:my.lists at verizon.net] 
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 10:58 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [AccessD] SQL vs DAO -- rattling cages


Speaking MDB's, and SQL as in SQL code, then you're tapping the JET
engine in all 3 cases be it by query or 2 diffrent forms of code.  When
access an MDB via code, DAO is always faster, but ADO is more suitable
if you will also be tapping into other data stores such as SQL Server or
Oracle.  In reguards to database bloat, an MDB will bloat because of the
required database space to store a temporary file be it sql or code.

IF you mean SQL as in SQL Server, then the advantages are many, but one
that comes to mind is the tempdb which is very useful because it holds
all the data temorarily when using groupby's or order by's in your SQL
code, of course you can't access this via DAO unless of course you have
the table linked to a MDB.

-Francisco
http://rcm.netfirms.com

On Monday, March 31, 2003 9:26 AM [GMT-8],
Susan Harkins <harkins at iglou.com> wrote:

: Charlotte and I are having a brief discussion off list of how SQL can
: solve some bloat problems. Now, I find SQL superior to DAO/ADO almost
: everytime and would rather work in SQL if given the choice. However,
: I have seen discussions about performance right here on this list --
: do any of you think DAO/ADO performs faster than SQL? If so, can you
: provide some statistics?
:
: SUsan H.


_______________________________________________
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com