Hi, I have worked using TYPE2 driver for Oracle-JDBC scenario.It was reasonably cool.And I was comfortable with that.But I have not used TYPE 3 and TYPE4 drivers.I have heard that they are more generic in the sense they are completely Java based.And the reusability is pretty good.The syntax wise also the changes are easy to be made.is it so?Does the "Java Data" deal with these advanced drivers? I hope it does.
Vaibhav, yes, Pro Java Data does discuss all types of JDBC drivers, including type 3 and type 4. But I don't think these are any more "advanced" than type 2 drivers, they're just implemented differently. Regards,
Thanks Bjarki. By the way how should we pronounce your name?I know you guys also might be finding our names tricky to be pronounced. So is it that people are shifting to TYPE3 and TYPE4?Or TYPE2 is pretty ok as far as reusability and perfonmance goes.
Well, it really depends on what drivers you are using, and what DBMS is targeted. There is really no simple answer to this. In one place, a type 2 driver might be the best choice, whereas you could have a type 3 driver somewhere else. Hmmm... how my name is pronounced? Try "Bjaarghi"... this is Icelandic, which is probably hard for everyone to pronounce (except for, maybe, Germans) Regards, ------------------ Bjarki Holm Author of Professional Java Data
Type 3: Net-protocol/all-Java driver follows a three-tiered approach whereby the JDBC database requests are passed through the network to the middle-tier server. The middle-tier server then translates the request (directly or indirectly) to the database-specific native-connectivity interface to further the request to the database server. If the middle-tier server is written in Java, it can use a type 1 or type 2 JDBC driver to do this. Type 4: Native-protocol/all-Java driver The native-protocol/all-Java driver converts JDBC calls into the vendor-specific DBMS protocol so that client applications can communicate directly with the database server. Level 4 drivers are completely implemented in Java to achieve platform independence and eliminate deployment administration issues.