I suggest that you learn how to use a stored procedure which will handle
some of those fairly complex data manipulations. Instead of making IB
prepare a lot of separate statements you can make one stored procedure with
all the logic in it and then prepare it and send it the information it needs
and it will all execute on the server.

This is the essence of the difference between PDOX and client/server is that
much of the processing can now actually be transferred to the computer
instead of forcing it to happen from the client.

Hang in there. People's criticisms of your approach should not be taken
personal. Bear with it because they are telling you things that will
eventually make you wonder how you tolerated using local file based database
systems.

If you try and make InterBase do exactly what PDOX does then PDOX is going
to seem faster. But, the thing you need to do is come to understand where
IB's strengths are and how to tap into them. It is well worth the time and
energy you will expend.

Regards,
Jason Wharton
CPS - Mesa AZ
http://www.ibobjects.com

----- Original Message -----
From: <SLSolutions@...>
To: <IBObjects@egroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 7:13 AM
Subject: [IBO] My final post about IB vs Paradox speed


> As a new Interbase/IBO user I made a post about the fact that my
> application accessed data much slower after converting to IB and
> asked for any help more advanced users could offer. Although, I did
> get a few attempts to help, most responses were about how silly my
> test was and defending the speed of Interbase and IBO.
>
> This is all nice but the fact is this: I have an accounting
> application that was written in DOS with Btrieve as the database. It
> has been running fine for about 10 years on hundreds of local
> networks. Several years ago, I converted the application to
> Windows/D5/Paradox. Again, it has been running fine except for the
> occasional index corruption by Paradox. When I heard about Interase
> and IBO I converted that application to D5/IB/IBO. The application
> ran fine but every module accedded that data much slower. I assumed,
> based on the many posts I had read about the speed of Interbase, that
> I had done something wrong.
>
> My initial conversion was using IBOTables. I assumed this could be
> the problem since I was not taking advantage of the full power of
> Interbase and IBO using this approach. So I took one module and did
> the conversion to IB_Querys etc.
>
> In this module, every time a new record is added, 3 support tables
> are updated. Two of the support tables have 12 records each added
> and the final support table gets 1 record added for a total of 25
> records added each time a record is added to the main table.
>
> In the Paradox version, this is instantaneous. The Save button is
> clicked, the records are added and control instantaneously returns to
> the user. In the Interbase version, there is a noticable lag.
>
> I then wrote a test program to add 1000 records to an interbase table
> and 1000 records to a Paradox table. The Interbase adds were
> significantly slower. I then posted the basics of the test program
> to see if someone could tell be what I was doing to cause this to be
> so slow. I never intended that this be interpreted as a "real life"
> application or an example of adding batch records. I simply thought
> someone would look at it and say "you need to do this" and my problem
> would be resolved.
>
> Instead, most posts were about how "silly" the test was, how no one
> would actually do this, etc. I did get a few usefull posts and made
> the suggested changes (Using Insert instead of Append, using INSERT
> INTO SQL using Parameters). Problem is, none of these increased the
> speed. I am fully aware that my test program is impractical since no
> one will probably add 1000 records to a file, however, my "real life"
> program does add 25 and IS significantly slower!!
>
> It was never my intent to imply that IB/IBO was slower than Paradox.
> I assumed, and still do, that something I am doing is causing the
> problem. I never intended my post to set off a frenzy of IB/IBO
> defenders.
>
> I made the initial post to the IBObjects group since the group states
> it is a place for both novice and experienced Interbase/IBO users. I
> have found that this group is probably not the best place for the
> novice user.
>
>
>
>
>