Subject Re: FB 1.5 vs. Win2003 + Xeon
Author Adam
--- In, Anderson Farias
<afarias.sistemas@...> wrote:
> Hi Adam, thanks for your comments
> |Well if you have already set the CPU affinity (and restarted the
> |service after making the change), then that won't be your problem.
> yes
> |What does '[very] bad performances' mean?
> Mean it runs "update and/or select" stored procs at least 10x
slower than
> any other simpler machines put as server.
> |Is FBServer CPU bound / IO Bound / not getting a chance to run
> |because the server is also running X, Y and Z?
> not really.

Actually, according to your answer below, it is CPU bound.

> BTW, on the 4 server cpu, it is noticed some times a 100% cpu usage
(the cpu
> used by FB) usually when running some "heavy processes" against the
> database.

This is perhaps garbage collection of an index with poor selectivity,
an issue that is meant to be resolved in FB 2 because the index
structure changes.

> |What is the file extension?
> .fdb


> |Are you using (drive) shadowing?
> no


> ...I´ll try switching to Firebird Classic as sugested by Rob Martin
> thanks Rob) on both servers, and see what happens.

You may see better performance as FB can use more than a single CPU
on it.

> I could also try to disable HT and see if it is the problem, but I
> people will not like this solution best. :-)

I have heard of that being an issue a while back, but it seems to
have been resolved and I have no problems with HT.