Subject | Re: pumping very large records (30 megs!) |
---|---|
Author | spou |
Post date | 2003-08-17T22:40:08Z |
I'll take your word for it. if a single transaction last for 48
hours, then FB is not the culprit indeed. I'd be happy for mine to
last 30 minutes, that would mean that the record was copied...
I've searched for your name, and came out with the feeling that you
post a lot! :-)
do you remember the subject of your post, or the approximate date?
that would help my research.
Thanx for you help,
Spou
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Alan McDonald" <alan@m...>
wrote:
hours, then FB is not the culprit indeed. I'd be happy for mine to
last 30 minutes, that would mean that the record was copied...
I've searched for your name, and came out with the feeling that you
post a lot! :-)
do you remember the subject of your post, or the approximate date?
that would help my research.
Thanx for you help,
Spou
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Alan McDonald" <alan@m...>
wrote:
> it's not the length of transaction - that I can swear on - some ofmy
> replication transactions can be over 48 hours. If you search thisgroup on
> my name you will find a very long message which details myexperience with
> 10054 and telsra networks which were finally fixed.megs!)
> Alan
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: spou [mailto:spou@v...]
> > Sent: Monday, 18 August 2003 1:33 AM
> > To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [firebird-support] Re: pumping very large records (30
> >for
> >
> > I've think about that too.
> >
> > But it means, for me, a game of ping pong between the consultant
> > our telecom setup, Bell for the transport, theplace that sold usthe
> > servers, and no doupt an endless game of finger pointing. I canwith no
> > already hear that "the datalink have been working fine for a
> > year", "we have no complaints about the network fiability", "both
> > servers have been in place and working fine for almost a year
> > glitch", ectserver)
> >
> > the fact that the connection is "reset by peer" (the firebird
> > would indicate to me that firebird have some kind of problemssingle
> > accepting large amout of data over a long period of time. A
> > record will take about 15 to 20 minutes to send, and there ismaybe
> > something that times out because of a long transactions. I thinkat
> > that only the guys that work with the code could tell us if it is
> > least possible.tried
> >
> > Spou
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Alan McDonald <alan@m...>
> > wrote:
> > > > Humm...
> > > >
> > > > Sorry to tell you that the ZEBEDEE solution just have been
> > andsame
> > > > failed.
> > > >
> > > > After a few setup trials, I managed to send 2 records! but it
> > > > crashed during the transfert of the 3rd one, still with the
> > > > errors (10054/10061).go
> > > >
> > >
> > > I have to say it again - if I were getting 10054 errors I would
> > straighthttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > to hardware as my culprit.
> > >
> > > Alan
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > firebird-support-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >
> >
> >