| Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Different performance Superserver VS. Embeded ? |
|---|---|
| Author | Helen Borrie |
| Post date | 2008-02-22T23:48:16Z |
At 09:05 AM 23/02/2008, you wrote:
Don't forget that the first run of a query will take longer than subsequent runs of the same query because the first run has to prepare. You probably need to do more testing. i.e., testing over a series of runs of the same prepared query. The client you're using will make a difference, too. You need to pick a tool that can be configured to emulate the workflow of your application. "Performance" depends greatly on how many round trips the client demands in a task.
./heLen
>Hi all;Assuming you are talking about Windows here, Embedded *is* Superserver. If you are connecting through XNET w. the full server SS, the performance should be either identical or Embedded should beat the full server. There is no physical network routing with XNET so, if the full server user is the only one logged on then the model is identical.
>
>Testing both type of Firebird flavors (Superserver 2.1 VS. Embeded
>2.1), just one connection in both tests, same database in both tests,
>same machine; I see very different performance resonving complex select
>commands. For a case, exactly same command runs very fast in
>Superserver (2 seconds) and very slow in Embeded (108 seconds).
>
>Is that normal?, or, is it possible to get same performance with
>embeded?.
Don't forget that the first run of a query will take longer than subsequent runs of the same query because the first run has to prepare. You probably need to do more testing. i.e., testing over a series of runs of the same prepared query. The client you're using will make a difference, too. You need to pick a tool that can be configured to emulate the workflow of your application. "Performance" depends greatly on how many round trips the client demands in a task.
./heLen