![remove native access remove native access](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/22/1d/e9/221de930ad1973f6b1741811b54363b2.jpg)
) I haven't used DB-Library since SQL Server 4.x days.but back then I remember it being substantially faster than ODBC. as well as being able to dynamically add and remove its supported TV Inputs.
Remove native access full#
Of course, if you don't think there will be a significant speed improvement with DB-Library, I won't even bother. Only signatureOrSystem TV Inputs and TV App have full access to the TV. In fact, in theory it could even support both, and only use DB-Library where available. Drag the app's icon to the Trash to remove it, Right-click on the Trash icon on the Dock, and select Empty Trash to delete the app you just removed. Quickly, you will see a programs list on the right pane, find and locate Native Access.
Remove native access update#
If MS ever does introduce a SQL Server product that is not going to support DB-Library, I'll have weeks to months of lead-time notice, and it will only take me a few days to update the service to support ODBC. Click Finder on the Dock, and then click Applications on the left pane. So if DB-Library is going to have a significant speed advantage, I don't mind having to implement ODBC later, as it won't be a huge effort. I will probably be able to implement the ODBC sproc invocation and result set parsing in a day or two tops.certainly in less time than implementing the DB-Library glue. I understand DB Library is deprecated and may no longer be supported in future SQL Server products, but as you can imagine this isn't going to be a whole lot of code. Thanks John, that was my thinking as well given that only fairly straight forward sprocs will be used, and certainly ODBC api's are a whole bunch simpler for this. Thanks - Ryan Edit: Forgot to mention: SQL Server 2005 or 2008 Please no comments about prematurely optimizing.
![remove native access remove native access](https://kruschecompany.com/public/uploads/images/original/oqmcz3cQ6Xdex6oet.png)
So every single CPU cycle I can save there, is one that is left for the database server process, which will be the bottleneck for the entire system. What would typically be the fastest databse access technology for this? SQL Native Access, and if so ODBC or OLE DB? Or what about DB-Library, which I hear may go away in future releases, and is no longer recommended (although I might still use it if it was substantially faster)8?28 Performance is critical here as the processing service is local to the database server. Assume a fairly simple native 64-bit service (C or C++) that listens to small incoming binary commands (pipe or TCP socket) which are enqueued in the receiving thread, and another thread which pops them off, parses them, and executes them against a *local* SQL Server database via a small set of stored procedures (currently 12 commands map to 12 procs, all with simple fixed length types: no blob's, no datetime, all strings fixed length).