|Subject||Re: FBv1.53 customer moved to Win2003 server = big slowdown|
> For what? The 3 clients are on different PCs running WinXP. ToRemote desktop does not connect to the same session as the database
> perform gbak/gsec operations I'm using GotoMyPC into one of their
> client PCs and then Remote Desktop to their server. Does that change
engine is running so the local protocol will not work. I believe this
is to be enhanced in 2.1 (someone correct me). Because of this, you
will need to connect using the TCP/IP loopback (ie, prepending
'localhost:' to your path).
>Yes. Right click C (or whatever drive your database is on) and choose
> > Volume Shadow Copy
> I assume that's a Win2003 feature and not Firebird shadowing.
properties. There is a tab called 'Shadow Copies'.
>The reason I have explained above. Another thing that I have seen
> > Switching from local protocol and TCP/IP loopback for use in terminal
> > services / remote desktop.
> It was a typical firebird installation with an alias addded to
> alias.conf. When I use gbak/gsec it was unable to find the database
> (I just used the alias) so I had to use "localhost", which is the
> first time I've had to do that.
happenning is where due to some crazy configuration, localhost is not
set in the hosts file.
Try ping localhost
The first line should be something like:
Pinging MyServer [127.0.0.1] with 32 bytes of data:
If it says something else, you may be doing an unnecessary round trip
to a dns server somewhere. If so, add a line to your hosts file to map
it to 127.0.0.1.
>Very significant, because it is running in a different session. It is
> I'm a bit confused by Remote Desktop. Does that really change
> anything, it's still running on the server isn't it?
not the same thing as sitting in front of it.
> > techos go for broke and install every anti-spyware and anti-virus
> > package known to man on a new server.
> There's no anti-virus software on the PC.
>Let us know what you find. It will point the direction of the problem.
> > You will need to actually take a look at the server when it is going
> > slow. Is it CPU bound, Disk bound, network bound? That should point to
> > the solution.
> Yes, that's next on my list.
>It did your database good anyway even if it does not solve this
> > I would also try a backup-restore cycle which removes all garbage
> and rebalances all your indices.
> Already done that and they report little difference.