Link to home
Start Free TrialLog in
Avatar of stankstank
stankstank

asked on

Multiple ConnectionStrings & Performance

I have read that connection pooling helps database performance and that making seperate connection strings for reading/writing helps.  The connection pooling part is obvious, but I am not sure about the multiple connection strings based on their role.  Is this true?  Is it better to have a connection string for reading and one for writing, another for updating - or would one connection string for my whole web app be sufficient?

Does this matter, or am I looking in the wrong places performance help?

THank you,

STank
Avatar of QPR
QPR
Flag of New Zealand image

Multiple conn strings will chew up server memory as each instance of the conn object is created and it's methods exposed. Would the read/write part not be more applicable to the recordset object?

Avatar of stankstank
stankstank

ASKER

>> Would the read/write part not be more applicable to the recordset object? <<
I don't know or understand the question.  I have read that a connectionstring for reading and one for writing is better because the database uses them differently and can handle each more efficiently.
I may be getting mixed up between classic ASP (before .NET) and it may be different now but.....
In ASP the "connection" object was the tunnel that ran between your page/app and the datasource.

The "recordset" object was the vehicle that retrieved the data from the datasource.
This recordset object came in different flavours, read only or updateable etc
i don't know, but I am using .NET.  I believe the recordset object is classic ASP.
Any sql server experts want to take a shot at this one?

stank
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
Avatar of QPR
QPR
Flag of New Zealand image

Link to home
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
Start Free Trial