Look, relax: No one is suggesting that we *eliminate* DSN-less connections, only to come up with a reasonable *default* for ODBC connection specifications. A mechanism for non-DSN connections will certainly be provided.
> > Well, > Based on : > http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/070399-1.shtml > > "These tests showed that DSN-less connections were slightly faster > than System DSN connections. The increase in performance was nothing > monumental; the greatest performance boost was a mere 13% faster with > 64 concurrent requests. For one, two, or four concurrent requests, > there was virtually no performance improvement. In fact, no noticeable > improvement is seen in a DSN-less connection over a System DSN until > there are 10 or more concurrent connections." > > > Also, I don't know how things work in hosted environments but if they > charge for setting up system dsn then that might be another reason to > use dsn-less connection. > > Also porting an application that that uses dsn-less connection is > easier then porting an application that requires system dsn to be > setup. > > Lucas > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
