Subject Re: [firebird-support] Migrating a 2.5 server
Author Leandro Melo de Sales
Hi folks,

I would like to add a sub-topic in this discussion: currently, I'm using the nbackup tool to run full/incremental backup. I'll have to update the Linux box from CentOS 5.7 (2011) to Ubuntu 16.04 (current LTS). Considering both has Firebird 2.5.x, is there any issue related to backup/restore the database file in this scenario that I need to know before proceeding with the server update?

I usually read people here suggesting the use of gbak and rarely suggestions to use nbackup. I have read the manual and for me nbackup is better because I can execute full/incremental backups. Any comment here?

Em 7 de fev de 2017 06:53, "Luke Crooks luke@... [firebird-support]" <> escreveu:

Thanks Lester,

Due to the TA+ Software not doing what we want completely, I have already written a web front end to the database which performs quickly (as expected) but that's from a FreeBSD client (either to Windows or FreeBSD Firebird server), so it must be something on the Windows (10) client end that is causing the slow connection to remote machines.

The network architecture is over engineered for the nature of the site, I am even doing firebird mappings direct with Static IP's over machine names and still getting issues. SafeScan have provided 2 updates in the last 6 months (to which we are using) so I imagine this must be either a Windows client issue or just poorly written software from SafeScan. 


I moved FireBird onto a different (dedicated SQL server) and the same performance issues were apparent. 

Luke Crooks
Solent Wholesale Carpets

On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Lester Caine lester@... [firebird-support] <firebird-support@yahoogroups. com> wrote:

On 07/02/17 08:14, Luke Crooks luke@...
[firebird-support] wrote:
> When running the 2.5 server on our Windows DC and having clients access
> from the local network, performance was very slow (almost unusable). We
> are using a safescan product (Time Attendance +) which uses a firebird
> database. So to combat this, I first tried serving the file locally on a
> machine and accessing it this way, no performance issues here.
> So I then had the idea that it could be that our windows server has to
> much load already, so I installed firebird on our onsite dedicated SQL
> server (this server is much quicker by comparison, 8 cores, 32GB of ram
> and runs postgres for us with loads of resources to spare). So I
> installed firebird on this SQL server (FreeBSD), configured the software
> to point to the new database, and yet again the performance is awful,
> does anyone have an idea what might be causing such slow speeds when
> connecting to a database locally? I can't see the firewall blocking
> anything and have given full access to port 3050, thanks.

I have a similar sort of legacy product which started life on a local
windows box at each site and eventually progressed to running via a
remote Linux server with local windows clients. Some sites we had
problems with slow connection times, and it was invariably due to the
network configuration. Looking up IP addresses from machine names which
is not something that should be a problem, but switching those sites to
use static IP addresses invariably sorted things out.

But since TA+ seems to be running as a windows client application, it
may be having fun with some of the more recent developments in Windows
OS. So what version of Windows are you running on? I would expect
Safescan to provide updates to cope with the M$ aspects of their product
since they are charging for it ;) My client interfaces moved to web
based 15 odd years ago to remove THAT management problem ... and
Firebird continues to provide a response time in the fractions of a
second on my systems.

Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services -
EnquirySolve -
Model Engineers Digital Workshop -
Rainbow Digital Media - uk