Subject Re: [firebird-support] Size influencing speed
Author Helen Borrie
At 07:57 AM 12/01/2004 -0400, Daniel Rail wrote:

> >> Firebird 1.03
> >> Windows 2000 Professional
> >> Page buffers = 8192
> > I would have to wonder whether, with 3200 tables, you are experiencing a
> > connection/schema load pause, rather than a select from the small table
> > slowness??
>I think it might be related to the metadata on the server. The system
>tables in FB 1.0.3 don't have indices. FB 1.5 now have indices and
>the performance is faster when preparing a DML statement. With 3200
>tables, the performance gain will be noticeable in FB 1.5 compared to
>FB 1.0.3.

I'd still go with the McDonald theory of it taking a monumental age to
query the system tables on connection to update the client's metadata cache
for 3200 tables. With indexes on the system tables, *that* step should be
faster in 1.5, but it still will be a long pause on connection.

The question at hand isn't whether 1.5 is faster than 1.0.3 but whether
querying slows down as the database gets bigger.

The classic answer is "How long is a piece of string?" A squeaky-clean
small database and a squeaky-clean large database (i.e. clear of garbage)
should be equivalent in performance, provided each is configured with a
dbcache appropriate to its overall size.