In memory tables or not

[Markus.Humm]

Hello,

I'm currently in the process of deciding wether to use some form
of in memory tables for my project or not. I'm just unsure whether it
really benefits me that much.

My project will use some domain specific language where the available
parameters with their options/features/limitations etc. are stored in a
database (Firebird) which is currently accessed via dbExpress.

This domain specific language concept isn't yet fully developped or
tried yet but shall be used for flexibility and maintainability.

The thing is: these language parameters etc. won't change during the
runtime of a session of my application so they're considered to be
static. I need/want fast access on them as they will be needed for query
processing in my system. they will be spread over several tables. So
would a in memory table system improve performance here? Or does
dbExpress or the database (Firebird) do enough caching anyway so that I
won't see any difference anyway?

Greetings

Markus

[Bill Todd [TeamB]]

The database server may or may not have the data in its cache when you
need it. You have no control over that. Even if the data is in the
Firebird cache it is still on the server and much be moved across the
network to the client. When you use an in memory table the data is
always cached on the client so it is instantly available.

[Bill Todd [TeamB]]

Post by Bill Todd [TeamB]
The database server may or may not have the data in its cache when you
need it. You have no control over that. Even if the data is in the
Firebird cache it is still on the server and much be moved across the
network to the client. When you use an in memory table the data is
always cached on the client so it is instantly available.

That should be "and must be moved...".

[Markus.Humm]

Bill Todd [TeamB] schrieb:

[snip]

Post by Bill Todd [TeamB]
That should be "and must be moved...".

Assumed that you made a typo... ;-)

Greetings

Markus