Dmitry,

This question should, with all deference to Ann, be better addressed to
Charlie C, since I expect that he either wrote or was keenly involved in
the architecture of these new IB 6.0 features.

I, like you, will keenly await him response.


Sean

-----Original Message-----
From: Dmitry Kuzmenko [mailto:dima@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 7:56 AM
To: IB-Architect@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [IB-Architect] New feature request (thread priority)

Hello, Ann!

"Ann W. Harrison" wrote:

>
> At 01:16 PM 11/25/2000 +0100, Toni Martir wrote:
>
> >The feature request is to create a new transaction parameter option

like:

> >
> >tpb_high_priority
> >tpb_low_priority
>
> Jim has just explained the first issue I have with this proposal -
> low priority threads blocking high priority threads and unable to
> run because of their priority.

I saw in sources that sweep thread is starting with LOW priority. Does
this mean
that sweep will never end if there are other activity on the server?
I've already asked this question at sourceforge.net/projects/firebird,
but
nobody answered.

According to your great posting about very long garbage collection when
there are
non-unique index with a lot of duplicates, seems that setting sweep
thread priority
to LOW is not a great idea.
Does anybody have tested sweep process with low priority? Maybe it is
better to
allow DBA to configure priority of sweep thread in IBCONFIG?

p.s. another thing I saw in sources is garbage collector thread with
MIDDLE priority.
Is there any description what is the difference between sweep and
garbage collector's threads,
and why their priority LOW and MIDDLE, and how this will affect
performance on production
databases?

--
Dmitry Kuzmenko, Epsylon Technologies.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com