M
Mike Fechner
Guest
I have not decided to “pay the performance cost of persisting to disk and …” There are use cases for storing structured data (aka objects) in the DB without the need to have matching relational structures. Storing JSON is very convenient for that. IMHO with no real alternative (other than XML which is ugly to process in the language). Everything that may make this more efficient is welcome. I am surprised that this seems such a strange use case for you. From: Thomas Mercer-Hursh [mailto:bounce-tamhas@community.progress.com] Sent: Samstag, 14. Juni 2014 23:31 To: TU.OE.General@community.progress.com Subject: RE: [Technical Users - OE General] json datatype RE: json datatype Reply by Thomas Mercer-Hursh Huh? No-undo variables are significant because, *cumulatively* keeping BI state on a large number of variables introduces BI overhead, i.e., disk I/O which impacts application performance. What exactly are you doing with JSON objects ... JSON object which you have decided to pay the performance cost of persisting to disk and then find and reading again ... where the cost to reconstitute the JSON object itself more efficiently is going to make a meaningful difference to the performance ... again, noting that we are already talking in the context of a disk access? Stop receiving emails on this subject. Flag this post as spam/abuse.
Continue reading...
Continue reading...