Subject RE: [firebird-support] Re: performance issue with firebird 3.0 embedded on linux
Author chen hsu
Post date 2016-06-17T18:25:14Z
Thanks, these tips are very helpful. 

#1: has very good improvement, please see the new result below.  but will this turning off of write-barrier cause data loss in case of power loss? Write-barrier looks about the ordering of journaling transaction content and commit record, how come it impacts firebird so dramatically? 

#2: totally agree. 

#3: yes, I am using classic or superclassic. 

The other thing I am still wondering is, it looks that increasing number of threads did not improve the performance much? In my specific experiment, it starts with 5 tx/sec with 1 thread, and increases only to 8-9 tx/sec with 6 threads. 

with one cpu, 200 insertion per transaction, 1 transaction in total. each record is 128 bytes. 
* Finish Insert: total=25600 bytes elapsed=00.193 throughput=132642.487047 bytes/sec, 1036.269430 ops/sec, 5.181347 tx/sec succeeded=1     <Old value is  4.098361 tx/sec>

with 2 cpus, 200 insertion per transaction, 2 transaction in total. each record is 128 bytes. 
* Finish Insert: total=51200 bytes elapsed=00.292 throughput=175342.465753 bytes/sec, 1369.863014 ops/sec, 6.849315 tx/sec succeeded=2    <Old is  1.106807 tx/sec>

with 3 cpus, 200 insertion per transaction, 3 transaction in total. each record is 128 bytes. 
* Finish Insert: total=76800 bytes elapsed=00.375 throughput=204800.000000 bytes/sec, 1600.000000 ops/sec, 8.000000 tx/sec succeeded=3    <Old is  1.262095 tx/sec>

with 4 cpus, 200 insertion per transaction, 4 transaction in total. each record is 128 bytes. 
* Finish Insert: total=102400 bytes elapsed=00.473 throughput=216490.486258 bytes/sec, 1691.331924 ops/sec, 8.456660 tx/sec succeeded=4    <Old is  0.743080 tx/sec>

with 5 cpus, 200 insertion per transaction, 5 transaction in total. each record is 128 bytes. 
* Finish Insert: total=128000 bytes elapsed=00.590 throughput=216949.152542 bytes/sec, 1694.915254 ops/sec, 8.474576 tx/sec succeeded=5    <Old is  0.777847 tx/sec >

with 6 cpus, 200 insertion per transaction, 6 transaction in total. each record is 128 bytes. 
* Finish Insert: total=153600 bytes elapsed=00.717 throughput=214225.941423 bytes/sec, 1673.640167 ops/sec, 8.368201 tx/sec succeeded=6    <Old is  0.783801 tx/sec >


To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:06:12 -0700
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: performance issue with firebird 3.0 embedded on linux

 
Hi!

#1 : FB does not like ext4 : Firebird News » Forced Writes Performance impact on #Ubuntu with ext4 no barrier
 


#2 : HT is no necessary a good idea in case of data intensive applications (eg. databases) : Be aware: To Hyper or not to Hyper

#3 : Use classic server, or superclassic (superserver does not like concurrency is a single database).



#4 : I think the bottleneck here is the disk, not the engine itself. We made a test for bulk insert and best method was to run execute blocks with as many inserts as possible in it in a single thread. We achieved
8-9K records / sec for small tables and 3-4K records / sec for bigger tables. (tables were not indexed, and it was a simple HDD)