Subject | Re: [ib-support] Re: Why is Interbase so slow? |
---|---|
Author | Helen Borrie |
Post date | 2001-09-27T04:11:07Z |
At 01:00 AM 27-09-01 +0000, you wrote:
The (functionally equivalent) procedure should be faster on both because it is not creating the huge volume of intermediate sets that your original CSQ is doing.
Are you by any chance trying to use the BDE with an IB 6 Dialect 3 database?
Regards,
Helen
All for Open and Open for All
InterBase Developer Initiative ยท http://www.interbase2000.org
_______________________________________________________
>Thanks for your time and efforts Helen,So something else is going on in your setup. With the volume of data involved, that solution should have been close to sub-second.
>
>I entered the procedure and executed it - I stopped Interbase after 1
>1/2 hours.
>
>So no great improvement.
>I have been developing apps using Interbase for over 4 years and haveWhat kind of front end and connectivity are you using/have you been using? Is this the kind of performance you have been used to?
>about 30 customers using Interbase - I am looking down the barrel of
>dumping Interbase - this is not what I want to choose.
>The basis of my question I guess is why is it so difficult withThe normal experience is for the boot to be on the other foot. Queries that take hours or days (or never complete) in SQL Server are scores or hundreds of times faster in IB.
>Interbase and so easy for SQL_SERVER?
>Hours compared to 2 seconds, for exactly the same query - on exactlyDefinitely something wrong then. Give us some details - server setup, client setup, versions, client tools, etc.
>the same server.
>Why do I need to enter a procedure for Interbase, when I don't to getA correlated subquery that is slow on IB should be even slower on SQL Server. If it only takes 2 secs on SQL Server, it should be as fast or faster on IB unless there is something fundamentally wrong with your IB setup.
>a decent response from SQL_SERVER?
The (functionally equivalent) procedure should be faster on both because it is not creating the huge volume of intermediate sets that your original CSQ is doing.
>I have over 30 customers using Interbase - and my larger customersThen you need to configure the temp files (these can be multiple and of any max size up to the OS limit). Perhaps this is your problem...please provide details.
>(ie database size > 100mb) the reports die with blown temp files on
>the server.
>SQL_SERVER replies in seconds with the same complex queries enteredYep, sounds like a configuration problem if you are querying both databases through the BDE - they should be equally crippled.
>using SQL_Explorer.
Are you by any chance trying to use the BDE with an IB 6 Dialect 3 database?
>Do I have to re-write my app to use SQL_SERVER instead?Your choice. :) But it sounds as if you have a serious IB misconfiguration there. To avoid guessing games, please provide details (paste in a copy of your ibconfig file).
Regards,
Helen
All for Open and Open for All
InterBase Developer Initiative ยท http://www.interbase2000.org
_______________________________________________________