Subject | Re: [IBO] Write performance with Vista |
---|---|
Author | Robert martin |
Post date | 2008-09-04T21:59:02Z |
Hi
Sorry I never noticed the reference to IB_Pump before.
Geoff is correct. This is actually a FB 1.5 (<=) issue that is mostly
resolved in FB 2. The issue appears on Multi CPU / Core cpus with
SuperServer. We had a DB that took 45mins to pump, putting it on a dual
core machine pushed this out to 1.5 days. I think setting the CPU
Affinity fixed this issue. I would guess that the Vista machine is also
a new Dual / Quad core cpu.
Rob
Geoff Worboys wrote:
Sorry I never noticed the reference to IB_Pump before.
Geoff is correct. This is actually a FB 1.5 (<=) issue that is mostly
resolved in FB 2. The issue appears on Multi CPU / Core cpus with
SuperServer. We had a DB that took 45mins to pump, putting it on a dual
core machine pushed this out to 1.5 days. I think setting the CPU
Affinity fixed this issue. I would guess that the Vista machine is also
a new Dual / Quad core cpu.
Rob
Geoff Worboys wrote:
> Hi Henry,
>
>
>> I have an app with Delphi 5 and IBObject 4.5 (an old version).
>> With IB_Pump I have very slow performance on Vista (100 times
>> slower than on XP Pro)
>> When using and enabling TIB_Monitor (with or without setting
>> OnMonitorOutputItem) the performance is correct
>>
>
>
>> Have you any idea on how to get good performance without enabling
>> IB_Monitor ?
>>
>
> What version of Firebird? (v1 or v2, classic or superserver).
> Are you connecting to the same FB server for both connections?
>
> I know of an issue with FB v1.5 superserver where such transfer
> processes will seem to pause at intervals (and can be restarted
> by having any sort of activity at all to the same server).
> The effects and timing of the pauses are highly variable (seems
> to partly depend on row sizes and column types). The dramatic
> change you describe seems similar, wondering if perhaps Vista
> makes the problem more obvious.
>
> If you are using superserver v1.5 or earlier try classic. I
> believe the problem is supposed to be fixed in v2 but I am
> in the process of migrating so cannot confirm.
>
>