Subject | Re: Update |
---|---|
Author | Michael Vilhelmsen <Michael.Vilhelmsen@M |
Post date | 2003-01-10T10:10:49Z |
I never specifie anything aout plan.
Should I do that ?
Would it bring up speed ?
I have one index which actually in this customers case alwasys holds
the same value ('Ingen længde').
Should I drop this ?
Michael
--- In ib-support@yahoogroups.com, Svein Erling Tysvaer
<svein.erling.tysvaer@k...> wrote:
Should I do that ?
Would it bring up speed ?
I have one index which actually in this customers case alwasys holds
the same value ('Ingen længde').
Should I drop this ?
Michael
--- In ib-support@yahoogroups.com, Svein Erling Tysvaer
<svein.erling.tysvaer@k...> wrote:
> Comments below:selectivity. I.e.
>
> At 09:26 10.01.2003 +0000, you wrote:
> >My customer complains about speed.
> >I have recently created those 40 index. Before there was only 4.
> >
> >Could those 40 index cause the system to slow down significantly?
>
> What you should ascertain, is that each index have a high
> don't index a field which only have very few values (e.g. booleanfields).
> If you have such indexes, consider either dropping the index oradding the
> PK at the end of the index. Indexes with low selectivity primarilyaffects
> speed during deletes and updates, not inserts.plan can
>
> Also, check the plan for your queries. Too many indexes within a
> be as bad as no indexes at all.that he
>
> >The other thing I have in mind is, that my gab between oldest
> >transaction and next transaction is somewhere around 2000.
> >
> >I think its one of the above that causes the slow update, but can I
> >tell which is more likely to do that ?
>
> Jason Chapman normally knows what he's talking about, and he wrote
> didn't think a gap of 2000 should be a problem. But that may dependupon
> how many records each transaction changes (to hold 1 old version of2000
> records is quite different from holding 2000 old versions ofmillions of
> records).opening
>
> >Besides, I think some of the clients have come to a habbit of
> >some windows, without closing them again.minuts
> >So now I'm I have started to change my appl. to close after 10
> >idle time.minutes
>
> What we do in our main application, is to pop up a window after 15
> of entering a new record. This window says that the transactionwill be
> terminated in 1 minute unless you press a button (with a more userfriendly
> message, of course). It is a good way to teach users how to work!and you
>
> If your customer have noticed that things have slowed down recently
> have done changes immediately prior to those changes, then thosechanges
> are the most likely cause of his slowdown. Hope you'll find thesource of
> your problems.
>
> HTH,
>
> Set
>
> - I support Firebird, I am a FirebirdSQL Foundation member.
> - Join today at http://www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation