Hi Andrey,
If you don't need XQJ specific features and don't afraid of proprietary API
your choise is the Sedna's native driver. Since it's very simple it'll be
really easy to migrate to XQJ or XML:DB if you'll need to.
So what would be a better choice? Which performs better / less memory?
>
We don't have exact numbers. Probably, Charles does? However, I believe,
Sedna driver's performance should be better (or equal at least) since it's
just thin wrapper over low-level network protocol.
Why Sedna own API disappeared from downloads page?
>
It haven't ever been there actually. It's distributed with Sedna and could
be found inside any Sedna package.
Ivan Shcheklein,
Sedna Team
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports
standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3.
Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great
experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb
_______________________________________________
Sedna-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sedna-discussion
