One thing I could add is that several years ago I ran into one of these
situations where Firebird 1.0 was way slower than MSSQL. Back then I messed
aroud with specifying an execution plan and solved the problem that way. It
was a question of the optimizer, actually. Since that has been improved,
these cases must be rarer, but it might be worth a try in some situations
where the difference is to great.

Mauricio

On 3/1/06, Roman Rokytskyy <rrokytskyy@...> wrote:
>
> > If anyone has valid ammunition that I can take to a client that is
> > making a fuss about Firebird performance on Windows compared to
> > MSSQL
>
> Some numbers comparing FB 2.0 and MS SQL Server 2000 on TPC-R test (22
> different queries for the DSS system):
>
> MSSQL/FB2
>
> 70%
> 21%
> 505%
> 3718%
> 469%
> 211%
> 5%
> 57%
> 125%
> 89%
> 548%
> 679%
> 87%
> 30%
> 89%
> 0%
> 215%
> 136%
> 94%
> 372%
> 344%
> 194%
>
> As you see, sometimes it is much more faster and sometimes it is
> really slow. If you're interested, you can use the AS3AP benchmark
> (available from our CVS) and test it on your computer (possible some
> changes are needed, but I can help you there).
>
> What seems to me to be much more important, is the amount of
> administration tasks, which is higher in SQL Server. Firebird just
> runs and you won't see it. And the price.
>
> But I guess, if the customer really-really wants to have MS SQL Server
> and you really-really wants to sell him your application, you have no
> other choice.
>
> Roman
>
>
>
>
>
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: Firebird-general-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: Firebird-general-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: Firebird-general-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/community/Firebird-general
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]