ODBC vs OLE DB

[Luvsql]

I have a report that I have tested the performance using variances datasources. It accesses a sql server:

OLE DB with windows authentication (user is sys admin): 42 seconds to complete report

OLE DB with sql authentication, where I manually type in a sql user ID and password: 19 seconds

ODBC with sql authentication: 6 seconds

ODBC with windows authentication: Unable to convert report as it doesn't show any sql tables or views, even though my windows account is sysadmin


Why is ODBC so much faster? I don't want to use ODBC as it requires every client accessing to have the ODBC setup, has issues where database has '-' in the name, does not seem to work with windows authentication.

 

[synapsevampire]

Please post your Crystal version.

OLE DB hasn't lived up to the hype that it would replace ODBC in my estimation because of the performance issues. Older versions of Crystal could use a native connection which may prove slightly faster.

As for the Windows Authentication, there is overhead involved here.

Your timing tests will likely vary anyway due to caching, it takes nuch more than one test to learn what the performance really is.

-k