Hi Peter
Running your benchmark, I ran into a couple of interesting points. Using mx.ODBC, my times were 0.54 seconds and 6.56 seconds respectively, while using adodbapi my results are 3.55 seconds and 25.9 seconds respectively. mx.ODBC is faster with the simple query you provide.
We agree on figures at this stage :)
Next I modified the benchmark to reflect my particular circumstances more accurately [...] reduce the number of iterations from 100 to 10. Since there are 128000 records in the main table, the wait for 100 iterations was too long for my patience. Under these circumstances, mx.ODBC's numbers are 188.49 seconds and 377.56 seconds respectively, and adodbapi's times are 111.15 seconds and 223.55 seconds respectively.
This is an interesting feedback. It looks like both middleware have their distinct value and distinct set of advantages.
I'll definitely review my judgment on ADO!
My first wall-clock impressions are obvious exaggerations of reality, for which I duly apologize to all. However, adodbapi did prove to be faster in my admittedly very wacky common use case. Slower to connect, but faster to run a substantial query.
Comments? Questions? Suggestions for improvement?
Based on your results, my feeling is that mx.ODBC remains a solution of choice for db-support behing web services "à la mod_python" where connection time is essential whilst adodbapi would be the definite winner when it comes to typical db-intensive win32-based applications (such as wxpython-based ones).
Regards to you
Francois
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
