> > > Yes I agree in keeping them short....
> > >
> > > But we have a procedure, that will select around 280.000 records (some
> > > varchar, some integer, some numeric etc).
> > > The program will iterate through them, and insert 1 new record for
> > > each of them.
> > >
> > > WITHOUT unidirectional I get a OUT OF MEMORY.
> > >
> > > WITH unidirectional I do not get this.
> > >
> > > At this point, I have to come up with a solution that will work NOW.
> > > I have to rewrite to code at some time, to make it better.
> > >
> > > So thats the reason......
> >
> > Why not create a Stored Procedure for this :-)
> >
>
> selecting * for 280000 records in an SP is notmuch better than doing it at
> the client. In an SP, the server will still cache them out to disk again

Well, you do avoid the network traffic and the client side caching problem.

> before it starts to walk thru them.
> It's miles better to keep them in the fdb file and memory only - not back
> out onto disk again.

They don't _have_ to go to disk if Firebird doesn't want to. It depends
on the current cache fill, the amount of memory available etc ...

Either way, if Firebird didn't want to handle several thousands of records,
it shouldn't have become a database engine ;-)

With regards,

Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, Oracle & MS SQL
Server
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
Database development questions? Check the forum!
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com