The system is fully functional during a sweep. Users may notice a
slowdown. You will have to test to see if the slowdown is acceptable.
Instead of worrying about it, we just run the sweep at night, when the
usage is lightest.
If you run your backup at night, that will also impose a load on the
system, but it will also perform garbage collection so you won't need to
sweep.

-----Original Message-----
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of berniebialt
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 5:53 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Poor Performance

So are you saying that there is no danger of running a sweep operation
when users are on the system or that if users are on the system they can
only inquire while a sweep is running?



--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Debay" <rdebay@r...>
wrote:

> We don't take it offline, if anyone were here at 2am they could

access

> the database. Sweep can run while users are running queries. A

nightly

> backup should do the same thing, and you could even freshen your

indices

> while you're at it.
>
> Rick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of berniebialt
> Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 8:49 PM
> To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Poor Performance
>
> So you would suggest taken the system offline and running a sweep

on a

> nightly basis?
>
>
> --- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Debay" <rdebay@r...>
> wrote:
> > We run a sweep every night in a cron job, a sweep triggered by an
> > interval would affect a real user.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of berniebialt
> > Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 9:19 AM
> > To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Poor Performance
> >
> > Ann:
> >
> > I ran gstat -h this morning after "sweeping" the database from
> yesterday
> > and there is almost a 1,000 transaction difference between "Oldest
> > Active" and "Next Transaction". This is certaintly more than
> several
> > hundred which is the number I believe that you indicated could
> cause
> > performance problems. All though the performance is still fine
> today, I
> > am wondering if I should be "Sweeping" this database on a nightly
> basis,
> > or set the sweep interval at a low level. I am trying to get my
> arms
> > around what these numbers represent, what is affecting them, and
> if they
> > are the root of the problem. Any input would be greatly
> appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Bernie
> >
> >
> > Database header page information:
> > Flags 0
> > Checksum 12345
> > Generation 525487
> > Page size 4096
> > ODS version 10.1
> > Oldest transaction 524565
> > Oldest active 524566
> > Oldest snapshot 524565
> > Next transaction 525474
> > Bumped transaction 1
> > Sequence number 0
> > Next attachment ID 0
> > Implementation ID 16
> > Shadow count 0
> > Page buffers 0
> > Next header page 0
> > Database dialect 3
> > Creation date Jul 14, 2004 20:58:53
> > Attributes force write
> >
> > Variable header data:
> > *END*
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Bernie
> >
> >
> > --- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Ann W. Harrison"
> > <aharrison@i...> wrote:
> > > berniebialt wrote:
> > > > Ann:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for respond to me. I ran gstat and here are some of
> the
> > > > details that I see:
> > > >
> > > > Oldest Transaction 434143
> > > > Oldest Active 446334
> > > > Oldest Snapshot 446334
> > > > Next Transaction 446335
> > > >
> > > > Is the issue the difference between Oldest Transaction and
> Next
> > > > Transaction?
> > >
> > > No, the problem would be between the oldest active and the
> next.
> > In
> > > this case, there's only a single transaction running. To

analyze

> > the
> > > problem, you're going to have to run gstat -h when the
> performance
> > is bad.
> > >
> > > > I noticed it is a differnce of over 12000. If this is the
> problem,
> > > > what would cause this to occur? and how could I keep this

from

> > > > happening going forward.
> > > >
> > >
> > > The oldest transaction - also called the oldest interesting
> > transaction
> > > - is the oldest transaction in any state other than committed.
> > Sweep
> > > moves that number along. 12000 is not very bad.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > >
> > > Ann
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > Visit http://firebird.sourceforge.net and click the Resources

item

> on
> > the main (top) menu. Try Knowledgebase and FAQ links !
> >
> > Also search the knowledgebases at http://www.ibphoenix.com
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Visit http://firebird.sourceforge.net and click the Resources item on
> the main (top) menu. Try Knowledgebase and FAQ links !
>
> Also search the knowledgebases at http://www.ibphoenix.com
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Visit http://firebird.sourceforge.net and click the Resources item on
the main (top) menu. Try Knowledgebase and FAQ links !

Also search the knowledgebases at http://www.ibphoenix.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yahoo! Groups Links