The JDBC-ODBC bridge adds an additional layer of overhead so that it will be slower than a JDBC solution. There has also been some evidence that the JDBC-ODBC contains memory leaks. If a driver is available for a particular database, it should always be used.
The JDBC-ODBC bridge is just a reference implementation. It's missing a lot of functionality that is in the JDBC 2.0 specification. I couldn't get a metadata object using the bridge driver. You should only use the JDBC-ODBC bridge to try out simple JDBC commands. Once you start doing some serious stuff with JDBC, then you should look into getting a driver implemented for your particular database engine. Thomas' advice is a good one. Once you're comfortable or know that you'll be using a particular database, then get the JDBC drivers for that database engine.
Joined: Jan 19, 2001
Thanks very much Peter and Tom. It's really helpful to get it cleared. -Rao
Originally posted by Peter Tran: I couldn't get a metadata object using the bridge driver.
Peter, this shouldn't be a problem. I do agree on avoiding the Bridge if it can be avoided, though.
Joined: Jan 02, 2001
Michael, When I tried get a metadata object, the JDBC-ODBC bridge threw me an exception. I'll try again, but I swore it was *not* working for me. -Peter [This message has been edited by Peter Tran (edited January 30, 2001).]
subject: advantage of JDBC drivers over JDBC-ODBC bridge