--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Helen Borrie <helebor@t...>
wrote:

> At 04:13 AM 30/11/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >I've just retrieved the firebird.conf file from the MAC... I haven't
> >examined this up until now because it seems I've never had to adjust
> >anything in that file on the windows platform.
> >Anyway, in both the MAC and Windows .conf files, ALL settings are
> >commented out, i.e are at their defaults (presumeably).
> >Can you (or anyone else) recommend any particular settings we should
> >try adjusting to increase performance? I'll start trying some things...
>
> The firebird.conf settings are fully documented in the v.1.5 release
> notes. I still think you have a big "unknown" in that you are

running an

> untested, multi-threaded server version on a platform whose threading
> behaviour isn't likely to be similar to the well-tried platforms.

In some respects that is true, it doesn't seem like many have
experimented with super-server on the MAC. However OSX is based on BSD
and I wouldn't expect the threading model to be too radically
different from other *nix's. If it was then all sorts of
multi-platform applications would suffer similar issues. (Or maybe
some do; I personally don't spend much time on the MAC :) )
One particular issue I find interesting and worth tracking down is
just why the call to UPPER(xxx) on the MAC causes such a performance
hit. If we solve that it may shed light on similar issues.

> Any numbers you come up with are likely to be very interesting to

other Mac

> users as long as you keep all of the variables under some kind of trace
> control. I can start a Mac Port page on the website if you think it's a
> good idea to have a central place for storing your tricks and gotchas.

Absolutely, if we discover any MAC tricks then I'll certainly spread
the knowledge here ;-)

> One place where resource starvation might be occurring is the page

cache

> setting - a too-high setting will kidnap too many resources on an
> under-resourced machine; a too-low setting won't help anything

much, as it

> will just pag to disk constantly and defeat the purpose of the cache.
>
> The "shipped" settings for Classic and SS are quite distinctly
> different. Classic uses cache and other resources in a totally

different

> way from SS. Another gotcha with SS is that a local connection

*must* be

> via localhost on ***X. This differs from Win32, which allows SS to

connect

> locally without a hostname in the path.

Can I clarify this - do you mean that when on the MAC, connecting to a
database on that same machine you must use 127.0.0.1 rather than say
192.168.0.100 (if that is it's IP address)? And you're talking about
in the connect string?

Thanks