Subject | Re: FB 2.5 and web application performance |
---|---|
Author | Jeff |
Post date | 2010-12-09T00:35:34Z |
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Alexandre Benson Smith <iblist@...> wrote:
Important question, did you do your testing with FB 2.5? Please note that my testing was done with FB 2.1x. I have not installed 2.5 yet.
> First of all... I am not a web developer, just did some pretty smallYes Alexandre, I agree that the speed improvements are huge. In my tests, the number of querries per second went way up yet the resource consumption (CPU usage) went way down!
> tests on this subject, so I have no solid experience on this...
>
> That said, I could say that I noticed a big speed improvement when using
> persistent connections in PHP.
Important question, did you do your testing with FB 2.5? Please note that my testing was done with FB 2.1x. I have not installed 2.5 yet.
> I don't know your programing language, but I think it should provideI am using C++ along with the IBPP library. There are some Firebird flags that you can set (readonly & readcommitted) that I found make your readonly connections as fast as possible.
> some similar mechanism as persistent connections on PHP, If a connection
> is kept open you will not lose the cache.
> Super Classic and Classic server has a cache per connection, so even ifI am reading the FB 2.5 release notes and it says "Superserver threads for each database are allotted evenly to available processors". My current server is a Quad core and I have CPU affinity set to one CPU, I think that I am going to upgrade to FB 2.5 so that I can set the CPU affinity for all 4 cores. I am guessing that Superserver is still my best option, especially since I am on a Windows server and can benefit from the shared cache.
> you already have a connection the other that comes will spawn a new
> process in classic or a new thread in Super Classic, but both will have
> a new cache and memory allocation on connection, so it could be worse
> from the "latency" to connect POV.