ive DB-Library connectivity?
What is recommended?
Thanks,
AdamSupportability would be the #1 reason for choosing OLEDB over DB Library.
DB Library is considered an a legacy interface and as such was not updated
from what shipped with SQL Server 6.5 and 7.0.
--Brian
(Please reply to the newsgroups only.)
"Adam Ticktin" <anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AD2D6770-2EBF-4886-BD6D-550AF7D6E6E7@.microsoft.com...
quote:|||Thanks Brian! Any known loss of available functionality in 2000 that can't b
> Are there any benefits in choosing OLE DB interface instead of using the
> native DB-Library connectivity?
> What is recommended?
> Thanks,
> Adam
e accessed DB-Library?
Adam|||Adam,
quote:
> Any known loss of available functionality in 2000
> that can't be accessed DB-Library?
Well, basically everything that was added to SQL Server after
version 6.5 is not supported by DB-Library.
DB-Library became obsolete years ago. Don't even think about using
it.
Linda|||I would not recommend using DB-Library. Yukon, the next release of SQL
Server, will not include the files needed to develop DB-Library
applications. The following warning has been in the readme of every SQL
Server 2000 service pack and in every update to the SQL Server 2000 Books
Online:
Warning While the DB-Library API is still supported in Microsoft SQL Server
2000, no future versions of SQL Server will include the files needed to do
programming work on applications that use this API. Connections from
existing applications written using DB-Library will still be supported in
the next version of SQL Server, but this support will also be dropped in a
future release. When writing new applications, avoid using DB-Library. When
modifying existing applications, you are strongly encouraged to remove
dependencies on DB-Library. Instead of DB-Library, you can use Microsoft
ActiveX Data Objects (ADO), OLE DB, or ODBC to access data in SQL Server.
Also, this topic in the SQL Server 2000 Books Online outlines the types of
features not available to DB-Library applications:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?...>
p?frame=true
And a third point against DB-Library: the SQL Server client components used
in ADO.NET, ADO, OLE DB, and ODBC are also native interfaces for SQL Server.
The SQLClient managed provider, the SQLOLEDB provider, and SQL Server ODBC
driver all use the native SQL Server protocol (TDS) to send their requests
to the database engine. DB-Library will not have an inherent performance
advantage over any of these APIs.
Alan Brewer [MSFT]
Lead programming Writer
SQL Server Documentation Team
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights|||examnotes (anonymous@.discussions.microsoft.com) writes:
quote:
> Thanks Brian! Any known loss of available functionality in 2000 that can't
> be accessed DB-Library?
Quite a bit.
I have a list on
es" target="_blank">http://www.sommarskog.se/mssqlperl/...tatyp
es
This text is in the context of two PERL modules that I have.
DB-Library is a very nice interface, fast and simple that does not
do things behind your back. Unfortunately, Microsoft does not at all
share my opinion on this matter.
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, sommar@.algonet.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techin.../2000/books.asp
No comments:
Post a Comment