In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg wrote: > If I compare a script using PEAR::DB with a script using > standard functions (and which supports mysql, pgsql and > sqlite databases), the script using PEAR::DB is 10 times > slower than the other. > > Conclusion : if you want to use PEAR::DB package, you'll > probably will have to use cache systems for scripts that > may be request often.
I don't understand your logic. Imho, you can only compare: - A without caching VS B without caching - A with caching VS B with caching > Am I the only one annoying by this loss of performance ? > Because this is a huge loss in that case ! I understand there might be a significant difference in performance, and i understand nobody likes that. But imho the real questions are these: - What are the advantages of a Database Abstraction API? - What are the disadvantages of a Database Abstraction API? - Can we live with the lesser performance if we know we'll safe a lot of time when we switch to another DBMS product? - How likely is it that we are going to switch to another DBMS? -- http://home.mysth.be/~timvw -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
