Subject RE: [firebird-support] performance issue with firebird 3.0 embedded on linux
Author chen hsu
Post date 2016-06-16T22:40:24Z
yes, one connection per database, any thread needs to access this database would create its own transaction. 

To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 21:38:48 +0200
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] performance issue with firebird 3.0 embedded on linux

 

Hi,
 
do you mean that you share one connection between multiple threads?
 
regards,
Karol Bieniaszewski
 
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 5:55 PM
Subject: RE: [firebird-support] performance issue with firebird 3.0 embedded on linux
 
 

Thanks, Helen. Please see my replies inline. 
 
I am sure it is not 3.0 specific, 2.5 is the same. and the main issue is scalability, sequential transaction performance is actually pretty good, comparable to ESE store on windows I was comparing firebird against.  but when running multiple transactions in parallel, ESE perf increased from 4 tx/sec to 26 tx/sec (128 byte/record, 200 records per transaction, 6 transaction threads on 6 cores, which I expect the best, logical cpu/ht is not very useful performance-wise), while firebird decreased. These transactions do not write-conflict with each other.
 
The basic flow of our code is like, first the main function creates a database connection, and spawns multiple threads, passing in the database connection. Each thread does this: create a transaction using the db connection, do insertion of data, and commit the transaction. Each thread measures its own elapsed time.&nb sp;


To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 19:04:33 +1200
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] performance issue with firebird 3.0 embedded on linux

 
Wednesday, June 15, 2016, 5:58:39 PM, Karol B. wrote:

> test without details say nothing to me
> 1. Did you
compare results with e.g. FB2.5 in on the same maschine with same configuration (FBConfig)
My project migrated from FB2.5 to FB3.0. I am pretty sure it is not 3.0 specific.

> 2. What is your page size and type of
HDD?
SSD. 512GB Samsung EVO 850. The file system is ext4, block size 4096.


> 3. Do you have BOST feature enabled on CPU and HT? --
Boost?
Yes, Turbo boost and hyper threading are enabled.

> 4. Did
you compare results on GLOBAL TEMPORARY TABLE - i know this is not the same but can show some info?
Could you give me some details about how to use GLOBAL TEMPORARY TABLE?


> 5. How do you test this times about your
threads and how do you start them?
I used the monolithic time in code i.e. clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &ts)  on each thread to calculate the elapsed time. should be high resolution.


> 6. Exact version of
FB
Firebird-3.0.0.32483-0

and 7. If on Windows, how did you go about configuring CpuAffinityMask?
- which processors did you intend to set it for and what was the value you configured?
It's on Linux, I read from document that multiple processors are by default enabled. but I anyway set CpuAffinityMask to 4095, but it seems no change to performance.

- did you try to do this configuration whilst an engine instance was running, without restarting?
No. each time I change configuration, I restart the program.

HB