At 07:11 AM 29/01/2008, Federico Bobbio wrote:

>I'm developing an app for a customer and using Firebird 2.0 SS on
>Windows xp. I've been reading other post related to this problem but i
>can't solve mine, hope you can give me a hand here.
>Well in the FB log i get this message thousands of times, even at the
>same second:
>
>FEDE (Server) Mon Jan 28 17:53:49 2008
> INET/inet_error: read errno = 10054
>
>I'm accesing through localhost to the DB, here are the statics:
>
>Database header page information:
> Flags 0
> Checksum 12345
> Generation 55371
> Page size 8192
> ODS version 11.0
> Oldest transaction 55367
> Oldest active 55368
> Oldest snapshot 55368
> Next transaction 55369
> 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 Aug 31, 2007 19:10:42
> Attributes force write
>
> Variable header data:
> *END*

Nothing wrong with these statistics.

>The application runs really slow and it takes a couple of minutes to
>perform any query.
>I read this problem could be from the network (as i'm using localhost
>maybe this is not the case)

It could be *part* of the problem. However, you have not explained "network".

-- Is this a single-user, stand-alone system?
-- Is it 2-tier client server or n-tier? If it is 2-tier then remote clients cannot access a database through localhost...

>, the user disconnecting from the server

Tell us more about "user disconnecting from the server".

>and a problem with the used SQL.

How long is a piece of string? Bad SQL can make response slow but it wouldn't directly cause a client connection to break...

>Could the problem be that when i need data from multiple tables i'm
>opening a lot of connections to get it?

Yes. The client should have one connection per thread and the work within one thread should never refer to other connections or to transactions and statements in other connections.

>If it is so, which would be the best way to do it?

First you should tell us more about what you are doing now.

>Or is this another problem i'm not seeing?

It appears there are architectural issues that you don't think are interesting enough to consider. So, when you tell us more about what you are trying to do, we can offer some suggestions.

>Any ideas of what i'm doing wrong here?

Yes, a few.

>If more info is needed let me know :)

Yes.

./heLen