SQL 7.0 SP4
Background: C++ program accesses SQL via ODBC doing
massive inserts to two different tables. The data goes
either to one table or the other, but not both.
Problem: Is it more efficient to have the program access
the database as one or two SQL users?
1. user DOG inserts to table XXX "and" table YYY.
or
2. user DOG inserts to table XXX,
user CAT inserts to table YYY?
Thanks for your help,
DonUnless you need to load them in parallel there isn't any reason to use two
users. Adding connections has a slight overhead that you probably don't
need for this type operation.
--
Andrew J. Kelly
SQL Server MVP
"Don" <ddachner@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0bf401c38126$d4174120$a001280a@.phx.gbl...
> SQL 7.0 SP4
> Background: C++ program accesses SQL via ODBC doing
> massive inserts to two different tables. The data goes
> either to one table or the other, but not both.
> Problem: Is it more efficient to have the program access
> the database as one or two SQL users?
> 1. user DOG inserts to table XXX "and" table YYY.
> or
> 2. user DOG inserts to table XXX,
> user CAT inserts to table YYY?
> Thanks for your help,
> Don|||no, it wouldn't make any difference in performance, it
will only increase work for you to manage permissions to
two users.
Also, consider using stored procedures rather than direct
insert statements. this will give slight performance gain,
and better management of sql code.
>--Original Message--
>SQL 7.0 SP4
>Background: C++ program accesses SQL via ODBC doing
>massive inserts to two different tables. The data goes
>either to one table or the other, but not both.
>Problem: Is it more efficient to have the program access
>the database as one or two SQL users?
>1. user DOG inserts to table XXX "and" table YYY.
>or
>2. user DOG inserts to table XXX,
> user CAT inserts to table YYY?
>Thanks for your help,
>Don
>.
>
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment