|Subject||Re: [firebird-support] Classic vs Superserver|
> I'm probably not good enough, technically, to contribute too muchBeside SQL tuning for short-term improvements, proper client transaction
> here, but nevertheless I would like to share my experiences. We are
> running Classic (still 1.5! in the process of migrating to 2.5) for
> many years now. Serving 6 databases concurrently used by some 50 users
> and 3 different applications.
> Database sizes are not too large, up to 1 GB, biggest queries are
> processing some 200.000 records, some StoredProcs are processing some
> 4-5 million records.
> That's up to 6*50*3 == 900 concurrent processes on the CS (yes, plus
> the mother process, plus 2 for gbak at times, plus a couple of
> zombies). A realistic average is some 300 concurrent processes at any
> Still using 1.5, my options of hunting down the regular slowdowns
> is quite limited in comparison with the wonderful things possible
> But I went through this often enough, using SysMon tools on the
> server (Windows Server 2003).
> Almost always, the cause for a slowdown is when 1 or 2 users are
> running complex reports. At this time, only 1 or 2 users are using up
> to 80% of CPU (50% max per process), and are causing thousand times as
> many disk writes as all the other 298 processes together.
> But while the queries of these 2 also run quite slow, the effect on
> all the other connections is much more drastic. You might say that the
> server is just not idle enough to serve 298 other connections in a
> decent way, because of just those 1 or 2.
> The effects are worse if the database has not been backup/restored for
> some time (2 months), and/or if "the GAP" is unusually big.
> I successfully managed to improve the situation over the years
> - Revised all read-only queries to indeed only run read-only instead
> of read/write
> - Close connections as soon as possible
> - avoid Rollbacks as often as possible
> - rethinking and redesigning the transaction management in the
management is a MUST for every Firebird-based client application and the
top-hitter for mid/long-term improvements.
Thus, the Firebird 2013 tour dedicated to Firebird transaction is a
pretty good move, IMHO:
> In addition, using new technologies for the applications made itConcurrent statement execution can also mean concurrent (random) I/O
> possible to reduce overall serverload dramatically (e.g. ADO.net).
> I changed one long-running report only recently and now it runs for
> 40 seconds instead of 10 minutes. The reduced time is not only good
> for the person running the report, but also for the server and thereby
> for all other users.
> Somewhere along the way, I *also* tried to change architecture to
> SuperServer, but I can assure you that this was only making things
> much worse.
> Today, we only very rarely still have problems with slowdowns. And I
> even have the database sweeping at normal intervals.
> What gives?
> If you want to analyse what's going on and what you need to do to
> improve it, don't just look at the queries which are slow, but most of
> all at those which are running concurrently! Re-thinking transaction
> management and application technology might bring much much more speed
> than tweaking any of the server parameters.
from a single rotating disk.
Professional Tools and Services for Firebird
FB TraceManager, IB LogManager, Database Health Check, Tuning etc.