Re: Implement SQL in Java

Discussion in 'Java' started by David Segall, May 31, 2004.

  1. David Segall

    David Segall Guest

    (Peter) wrote:

    >Hi
    > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
    >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
    >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
    >
    >
    >thanks
    >from Peter ()

    Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
    of Java?

    The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
    accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
    model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
    performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
    language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
    Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
    database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
    Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
    database and the development environment based on other criteria.

    The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
    platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
    rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
    was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
    Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
    Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
    single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
    for multi-platform support.
    David Segall, May 31, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Segall

    Peter Guest

    David Segall <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > (Peter) wrote:
    >
    > >Hi
    > > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
    > >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
    > >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
    > >
    > >
    > >thanks
    > >from Peter ()

    > Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
    > of Java?
    >
    > The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
    > accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
    > model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
    > performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
    > language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
    > Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
    > database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
    > Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
    > database and the development environment based on other criteria.
    >
    > The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
    > platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
    > rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
    > was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
    > Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
    > Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
    > single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
    > for multi-platform support.


    Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
    I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
    database application in Java.
    If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
    a database in Java? Does it have market?

    thanks
    from Peter (
    Peter, Jun 1, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Segall

    Liz Guest

    "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > David Segall <> wrote in message

    news:<>...
    > > (Peter) wrote:
    > >
    > > >Hi
    > > > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
    > > >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
    > > >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >thanks
    > > >from Peter ()

    > > Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
    > > of Java?
    > >
    > > The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
    > > accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
    > > model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
    > > performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
    > > language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
    > > Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
    > > database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
    > > Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
    > > database and the development environment based on other criteria.
    > >
    > > The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
    > > platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
    > > rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
    > > was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
    > > Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
    > > Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
    > > single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
    > > for multi-platform support.

    >
    > Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
    > I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
    > database application in Java.
    > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
    > a database in Java? Does it have market?
    >
    > thanks
    > from Peter (


    I think the earth will continue to spin if you don't develop one in Java.
    Liz, Jun 1, 2004
    #3
  4. David Segall

    Yu SONG Guest

    Peter wrote:
    >
    > Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
    > I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
    > database application in Java.
    > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
    > a database in Java? Does it have market?
    >
    > thanks
    > from Peter (


    80% slower???
    Have you tried that?

    It has a market, and it depends on your DB.
    (Of course, this won't happen if you've made a DB without any signifiant
    improvements and 80% slower than these available ones)

    --
    Song

    More info.:
    http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~esubbn/
    Yu SONG, Jun 1, 2004
    #4
  5. "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%.


    Where exactly did you get this information from? Do you have a link to the
    website or paper that says this?



    l8r, Mike N. Christoff
    Michael N. Christoff, Jun 1, 2004
    #5
  6. David Segall

    Peter Guest

    Yu SONG <> wrote in message news:<c9hhhh$qis$>...
    > Peter wrote:
    > >
    > > Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
    > > I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
    > > database application in Java.
    > > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    > > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
    > > a database in Java? Does it have market?
    > >
    > > thanks
    > > from Peter (

    >
    > 80% slower???
    > Have you tried that?
    >
    > It has a market, and it depends on your DB.
    > (Of course, this won't happen if you've made a DB without any signifiant
    > improvements and 80% slower than these available ones)


    It is hard. Other DB are made in C++. Java is impossible to faster than c++ i think.

    thanks
    from Peter ()
    Peter, Jun 2, 2004
    #6
  7. David Segall

    Chris Smith Guest

    Peter wrote:
    > It is hard. Other DB are made in C++. Java is impossible to
    > faster than c++ i think.


    It's exactly these statements that suggest to knowledgable people here
    that you don't know what you're talking about. Whether Java is slower
    than C++ (and by how much) on average, for typical code, is a very
    complex question that probably won't ever have a simple answer, but it's
    clearly false that "Java is impossible to faster than c++".

    After all, there are details of the Java language that permit
    optimizations that are not possible in C++, and the VM model allows for
    both dynamic optimizations that can be extremely helpful in some
    situations and also for more specialized code than can be generated by a
    once-only compiler that has to target a whole host of processors in a
    family. It's fairly well-established, for example, that CPU-bound
    applications with complex floating-point calculations are generally far
    faster in Java than C++. Facts just don't fit with your simplified
    world-view in which a Java application is always slower than the same
    application in C++.

    --
    www.designacourse.com
    The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

    Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
    MindIQ Corporation
    Chris Smith, Jun 2, 2004
    #7
  8. David Segall

    Roedy Green Guest

    On 1 Jun 2004 20:27:18 -0700, (Peter) wrote or
    quoted :

    >It is hard. Other DB are made in C++. Java is impossible to faster than c++ i think.


    I don't understand why there are so many SQL engines. There are so
    many other interesting projects that have not been tackled even once.

    See http://mindprod.com/projects/projects.html

    The big advantages of an SQL engine in Java are:

    1. it is truly portable. You don't need a separate tweak and separate
    install process for each platform.

    2. It could potentially run in the same JVM, thus improving the
    bandwidth of communication between the SQL and client part.

    3. It can be very simply installed, just add a reference to a jar to
    the JNLP spec.

    One big time waster in SQL is composing queries then parsing them
    again and taking apart rows field by field. Data could be delivered in
    both directions as preparsed objects. Perhaps someone could come up
    with a more Java-esque SQL interface that bypasses all that packing
    and unpacking overhead.


    --
    Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
    Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
    See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
    Roedy Green, Jun 2, 2004
    #8
  9. Are there any Java (open source) OODBMS engines?

    Roedy Green <> wrote:

    >I don't understand why there are so many SQL engines. There are so
    >many other interesting projects that have not been tackled even once.
    >
    >See http://mindprod.com/projects/projects.html
    >


    --
    Regards,
    Casey
    Casey Hawthorne, Jun 2, 2004
    #9
  10. David Segall

    Roedy Green Guest

    On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 07:40:35 GMT, Casey Hawthorne <>
    wrote or quoted :

    >Are there any Java (open source) OODBMS engines?


    There are more SQL engines than you can shake a stick at. Check out
    the list at http://mindprod.com/jgloss/sql.html to see which ones are
    opensource.


    --
    Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
    Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
    See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
    Roedy Green, Jun 2, 2004
    #10
  11. "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > David Segall <> wrote in message

    news:<>...
    > > (Peter) wrote:
    > >
    > > >Hi
    > > > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
    > > >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
    > > >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >thanks
    > > >from Peter ()

    > > Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
    > > of Java?
    > >
    > > The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
    > > accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
    > > model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
    > > performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
    > > language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
    > > Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
    > > database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
    > > Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
    > > database and the development environment based on other criteria.
    > >
    > > The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
    > > platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
    > > rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
    > > was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
    > > Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
    > > Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
    > > single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
    > > for multi-platform support.

    >
    > Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
    > I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
    > database application in Java.
    > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
    > a database in Java? Does it have market?
    >


    I think you need to take an extended look at this link. You can decide for
    yourself whether "Java is slow then c++ at least 80%" or not.

    http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.html

    I post this, but I'm 99% sure you won't read it. Ignorance is bliss I
    guess.



    l8r, Mike N. Christoff

    > thanks
    > from Peter (
    Michael N. Christoff, Jun 3, 2004
    #11
  12. David Segall

    Hylander Guest

    (Peter) wrote in message news:<>...
    > David Segall <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > > (Peter) wrote:
    > >
    > > >Hi
    > > > Please give me some advantages for implement a database in JAVA. If
    > > >we develop a JAVA-database, it must lose proformance. Almost database
    > > >doesn't need cross-platform. So what is the rest of advantage?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >thanks
    > > >from Peter ()

    > > Why "it must lose performance"? Which language might you use instead
    > > of Java?
    > >
    > > The release of the .NET framework indicates that Microsoft has
    > > accepted the protected Virtual Machine and object oriented language
    > > model exemplified by Sun's Java language and environment. The
    > > performance will be dictated by how well the vendor has optimised the
    > > language drivers and the database. It seems reasonable to assume that
    > > Microsoft's SQL Server will perform better using .NET and an Oracle
    > > database will perform better using Java because Oracle have selected
    > > Java as their development environment. You will need to select the
    > > database and the development environment based on other criteria.
    > >
    > > The disadvantage with .NET is not only that it cannot be used on other
    > > platforms. It is subject to the whims of Microsoft and it can be
    > > rendered obsolete in exactly the same way that Visual Basic "Classic"
    > > was discarded. Oracle, IBM and Sun support Java with a Java Virtual
    > > Machine and JDBC drivers. Microsoft provides JDBC drivers for SQL
    > > Server and MSDE. In other words, Java provides the best guarantee of
    > > single (Windows) platform support in addition to being the only choice
    > > for multi-platform support.

    >
    > Sorry guys, i lead you misunderstand.
    > I was asking the advantage to development a Database, not a
    > database application in Java.
    > If you develop a database in Java, it must have worst performance,
    > because Java is slow then c++ at least 80%. Then should we go to make
    > a database in Java? Does it have market?
    >


    You mean to develop a pure java database program like Hypersonic I
    think. Hypersonic / hsql may have some open sources that you can use
    to get ideas or you may decide to contribute to it/get involved.

    If you are citing an example of programming a database to harp on
    Java's renowned performance issues, you will find that the perceptions
    are often based on a small picture. To summarize, the slowness that
    many users experience is based on the GUI toolkit and not necessarily
    java itself. The next level of understanding however concerns itself
    with the byte code interpreter of the various JVM implementations.
    These vary in performance but also buy you various advantages compared
    to C/C++.

    Often, you will find that if you were to provide the same levels of
    safety and robustness/cleanup in a C program, the performance of that
    program would come very close to java's performance. The byte code
    interpretation overhead is nearly nullified with the progress that has
    been made over the years. It is on the order of 50% or less overhead.
    (which is good considering that many initially saw 10x or 1000%
    overhead initially).

    When it comes to language, we could take a look at the WordPerfect vs
    MSWord case study. WordPerfect lost it's market to Word *because* it
    was striving too hard to be performant while not being competitive
    with features / actual user/API developer experience. You can get to
    market much quicker in a language that is easier to program in. Also,
    given Moore's law (something about hardware performance doubling) and
    given that hardware is FTMP a commodity, (a non issue), you should
    really consider the big picture and then find out of performance
    figures into it. (the actual user's experience/ultimate perceived
    value being offered).
    Hylander, Jun 3, 2004
    #12
  13. David Segall

    Roedy Green Guest

    On 3 Jun 2004 12:15:32 -0700,
    (Hylander) wrote or quoted :

    > The byte code
    >interpretation overhead is nearly nullified with the progress that has
    >been made over the years


    But Java is NOT byte code interpreted anymore except in cellphones.
    It is hotspotted, jitted, or natively compiled.

    --
    Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
    Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
    See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
    Roedy Green, Jun 3, 2004
    #13
  14. David Segall

    Mohun Biswas Guest

    Roedy Green wrote:

    > On 3 Jun 2004 12:15:32 -0700,
    > (Hylander) wrote or quoted :
    >
    >
    >>The byte code
    >>interpretation overhead is nearly nullified with the progress that has
    >>been made over the years

    >
    >
    > But Java is NOT byte code interpreted anymore except in cellphones.
    > It is hotspotted, jitted, or natively compiled.


    Right, and these serve to nullify the byte code interpretation overhead.
    Like he said.

    --
    Thanks,
    M.Biswas
    Mohun Biswas, Jun 3, 2004
    #14
  15. David Segall

    Roedy Green Guest

    On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 21:49:12 GMT, Mohun Biswas <>
    wrote or quoted :

    >>
    >>>The byte code
    >>>interpretation overhead is nearly nullified with the progress that has
    >>>been made over the years

    >>
    >>
    >> But Java is NOT byte code interpreted anymore except in cellphones.
    >> It is hotspotted, jitted, or natively compiled.

    >
    >Right, and these serve to nullify the byte code interpretation overhead.
    >Like he said.


    He said something ambiguous that needs to be stated clearly. He made
    it sound as if byte interpretation technology has advanced.

    It is no different. It has been replaced.

    --
    Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
    Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
    See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
    Roedy Green, Jun 4, 2004
    #15
  16. David Segall

    Mohun Biswas Guest

    Roedy Green wrote:

    > On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 21:49:12 GMT, Mohun Biswas <>
    > wrote or quoted :
    >
    >
    >>>>The byte code
    >>>>interpretation overhead is nearly nullified with the progress that has
    >>>>been made over the years
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>But Java is NOT byte code interpreted anymore except in cellphones.
    >>>It is hotspotted, jitted, or natively compiled.

    >>
    >>Right, and these serve to nullify the byte code interpretation overhead.
    >>Like he said.

    >
    >
    > He said something ambiguous that needs to be stated clearly.


    Where I come from, starting with "But ... NOT" is the way to shout
    someone down, not the way to clarify.

    --
    Thanks,
    M.Biswas
    Mohun Biswas, Jun 4, 2004
    #16
  17. David Segall

    Roedy Green Guest

    On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 01:13:37 GMT, Mohun Biswas <>
    wrote or quoted :

    >Where I come from, starting with "But ... NOT" is the way to shout
    >someone down, not the way to clarify.


    Trolls have been driving me nuts on this issue recently. I figured he
    was doing the same stupid trick. You offered a different way to
    interpret his post.

    --
    Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
    Coaching, problem solving, economical contract programming.
    See http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jgloss.html for The Java Glossary.
    Roedy Green, Jun 4, 2004
    #17
  18. David Segall

    Guest

    Roedy Green <> wrote:
    > I don't understand why there are so many SQL engines. There are so
    > many other interesting projects that have not been tackled even once.


    It could be because people work on projects that interest them, and
    don't work on projects that don't interest them.
    , Jun 4, 2004
    #18
  19. David Segall

    Hylander Guest

    Roedy Green <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 21:49:12 GMT, Mohun Biswas <>
    > wrote or quoted :
    >
    > >>
    > >>>The byte code
    > >>>interpretation overhead is nearly nullified with the progress that has
    > >>>been made over the years
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> But Java is NOT byte code interpreted anymore except in cellphones.
    > >> It is hotspotted, jitted, or natively compiled.

    > >
    > >Right, and these serve to nullify the byte code interpretation overhead.
    > >Like he said.

    >
    > He said something ambiguous that needs to be stated clearly. He made
    > it sound as if byte interpretation technology has advanced.


    Hey! To someone who is pedantically knowledgable on Java, everything
    would be ambiguous. Whether it needs clarification is subjective. I do
    appreciate you indicated exactly what progress I was referring to. I'm
    not sure I would even limit it to just those though. I expected
    something more comprehensive out of you Roedy. ;)



    > It is no different. It has been replaced.
    Hylander, Jun 4, 2004
    #19
  20. David Segall

    Hylander Guest

    Roedy Green <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 01:13:37 GMT, Mohun Biswas <>
    > wrote or quoted :
    >
    > >Where I come from, starting with "But ... NOT" is the way to shout
    > >someone down, not the way to clarify.

    >
    > Trolls have been driving me nuts on this issue recently. I figured he
    > was doing the same stupid trick. You offered a different way to
    > interpret his post.


    Please don't associate me with trolls and treat me as such simply
    because you've had to deal with them. (someone by the name of Sigmeund
    IIRC mentioned something about "displaced anger" that seems fitting
    here).

    I think I've dedicated enough of my waking and sleeping life to java
    programming to deserve more than that. Not that I'm very publically
    seen on it or a high contributor or anything (yet) although I do plan
    on releasing my ideas to sourceforge at some point in the future).
    Just because I don't post here a lot doesn't mean I don't productively
    lurk here either.
    Hylander, Jun 4, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Lee Fesperman

    Re: Implement SQL in Java

    Lee Fesperman, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    450
    Hylander
    Jun 3, 2004
  2. Liz

    Re: Implement SQL in Java

    Liz, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    473
    Stefan Poehn
    Jun 4, 2004
  3. Jan Schulze
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    563
    Esmond Pitt
    Mar 26, 2005
  4. Thinker

    another SQL implement

    Thinker, Jan 8, 2007, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    282
    Thinker
    Jan 8, 2007
  5. ecoolone
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    745
    ecoolone
    Jan 3, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page