Daniel Reyes
3/23/2002 3:36:00 AM
Iv'e done a similar test on the Northwind Orders table, the results below
are in milliseconds.
The test was run in a console application, with 3 loops running 10 times for
ODBC, OLEDB, and SQL. The first set of results is creating a dataset, 2nd
set of results is creating a data reader. The default settings for each
provider was used.
With DataSet
======================
Running ODBC TEST
Run: 0 Execution Time:630.9072
Run: 1 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 2 Execution Time:170.2448
Run: 3 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 4 Execution Time:160.2304
Run: 5 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 6 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 7 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 8 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 9 Execution Time:160.2304
Running OLEDB TEST
Run: 0 Execution Time:310.4464
Run: 1 Execution Time:80.1152
Run: 2 Execution Time:150.216
Run: 3 Execution Time:80.1152
Run: 4 Execution Time:80.1152
Run: 5 Execution Time:100.144
Run: 6 Execution Time:80.1152
Run: 7 Execution Time:80.1152
Run: 8 Execution Time:80.1152
Run: 9 Execution Time:90.1296
Running SQL TEST
Run: 0 Execution Time:400.576
Run: 1 Execution Time:60.0864
Run: 2 Execution Time:50.072
Run: 3 Execution Time:60.0864
Run: 4 Execution Time:60.0864
Run: 5 Execution Time:100.144
Run: 6 Execution Time:50.072
Run: 7 Execution Time:60.0864
Run: 8 Execution Time:60.0864
Run: 9 Execution Time:60.0864
With DataReader
=====================
Running ODBC TEST
Run: 0 Execution Time:230.3312
Run: 1 Execution Time:30.0432
Run: 2 Execution Time:30.0432
Run: 3 Execution Time:30.0432
Run: 4 Execution Time:30.0432
Run: 5 Execution Time:20.0288
Run: 6 Execution Time:30.0432
Run: 7 Execution Time:30.0432
Run: 8 Execution Time:20.0288
Run: 9 Execution Time:30.0432
Running OLEDB TEST
Run: 0 Execution Time:200.288
Run: 1 Execution Time:20.0288
Run: 2 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 3 Execution Time:0
Run: 4 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 5 Execution Time:0
Run: 6 Execution Time:0
Run: 7 Execution Time:0
Run: 8 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 9 Execution Time:10.0144
Running SQL TEST
Run: 0 Execution Time:310.4464
Run: 1 Execution Time:0
Run: 2 Execution Time:0
Run: 3 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 4 Execution Time:0
Run: 5 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 6 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 7 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 8 Execution Time:10.0144
Run: 9 Execution Time:0
With these results, ODBC is definately the slowest.
"Teodorico Morell" <morellt@cantv.net> wrote in message
news:uzqoSzS0BHA.2488@tkmsftngp02...
> I have just finished some testing using these three methods with MS SQL
> Server 2000.
> I'm accessing the Northwind database and reading all the records on the
> orders table.
> My results are the following (In milliseconds):
>
>
> Run No. OleDb Odbc SqlClient
> ====================================
> 1 310.4464 150.216 460.6624
> 2 220.3168 140.2016 290.4176
> 3 220.3168 140.2016 290.4176
> 4 10.0144 10.0144 10.0144
>
> The first three runs where made by closing and starting the application.
> The fourth run, was using the connection cached (Without closing the app)
>
> The SqlClient results called my attention since is has the lowest values,
> when it is supposed to be optimized to access MS SQL Server.
> As always, OBDC is faster than OleDb provider. Comparing ODBC vs. OleDb, I
> had similar results with Visual Basic 6.0.
>
>
>