Subject RE: [firebird-support] Superserver 100% cpu FAQ
Author Scott Buckham
I am using Firebird 1.5.3. I am interested in two things:

Most importantly: Will doing a gbak (without �g) on a nightly basis help in
CPU spikes if garbage collection is the culprit. And secondly, does 2.0
handle garbage collection any better in this scenario (the FAQ suggested
that this was something being resolved in 3.0)




[] On Behalf Of Helen Borrie
Sent: Monday, 3 September 2007 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Superserver 100% cpu FAQ

At 11:12 AM 3/09/2007, you wrote:

>I am having a problem with the firebird super server which has its CPU peak
>at 100% for at least 30 seconds. I came across
which suggests a workable solution for me
>as the site already does a backup early in the morning whilst not trading.
>The system is also configured to restart Windows (XP) on completion.
>I wanted to know whether restarting the OS (and therefore Firebird) would
>have any effect on garbage collection.

Well, if a GC thread was in process at the time, it would die.

>Also if the site is already set to
>gbak with garbage collection and the the database is garbage collecting in
>normal operation, doesn't this suggest that there is enough garbage
>accumulating to need collection (or is the default sweep interval too

The sweep interval doesn't determine whether or not GC takes place.

What version of Superserver are you using? If v.2.0.x, are you aware
that the default is to have both flavours of GC (background and
cooperative) occurring in parallel? If you're running this version
and individual users are getting hit too often with cooperative GC,
you might want to consider reconfiguring the GCPolicy setting so that
it does only background GC...


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.2/985 - Release Date: 2/09/2007
4:32 PM

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.3/986 - Release Date: 3/09/2007
9:31 AM

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]