Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: AW: AW: [firebird-support] Firebird in automation

Expand Messages
  • Adomas Urbanavicius
    ... Ok then (About forced wrties - I agree absolutely.), lets make 20 threads to write 200 records each, and lets make writes and comits every 2secs, that
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Alexander Gräf wrote:

      >
      >
      >>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
      >>Von: Adomas Urbanavicius [mailto:adomas@...]
      >>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 1. Dezember 2004 15:36
      >>An: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
      >>Betreff: Re: AW: [firebird-support] Firebird in automation
      >>
      >>
      >>Well,
      >>
      >>It is interesting issue : if there are 20 connections, all
      >>are writing 50 records/sec, it would be much data safer than
      >>1000 records/sec with single connection, wouldnt it ?
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >No, because if all runs quite symmetrical, for each connection it would take exactly one second to write the 50 records. If the server crashes, the transaction of each connection is rolled back:
      >
      >
      >
      Ok then (About forced wrties - I agree absolutely.), lets make 20
      threads to write 200 records each, and lets make writes and comits every
      2secs, that would be 4000 recs, meantime, data would be only 2000recs,
      what means, that eveything will be ok, que every 2 secs will become empty.
      Adomas
    • Michele Cannella
      Thanks for your answers tills now. as you mentioned the data acquisition server must work 24 h/day then the general idea is to : - have a cache in memory (this
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for your answers tills now.

        as you mentioned the data acquisition server must work 24 h/day

        then the general idea is to :
        - have a cache in memory (this cache must be controlled by
        the application, not directly by firebird)
        - using more connection to the DB to move data to the DB
        in big transactions (with more seconds of data)

        Do you know is could be better to use an embedded version
        of firebird instead of standard (super server) one for
        windows (I am using 1.5.0 on the plant) ?

        Michele



        --- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Adomas Urbanavicius
        <adomas@i...> wrote:
        > Alexander Gräf wrote:
        >
        > >
        > >
        > >>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
        > >>Von: Adomas Urbanavicius [mailto:adomas@i...]
        > >>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 1. Dezember 2004 15:36
        > >>An: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
        > >>Betreff: Re: AW: [firebird-support] Firebird in automation
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>Well,
        > >>
        > >>It is interesting issue : if there are 20 connections, all
        > >>are writing 50 records/sec, it would be much data safer than
        > >>1000 records/sec with single connection, wouldnt it ?
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >
        > >No, because if all runs quite symmetrical, for each connection it
        would take exactly one second to write the 50 records. If the server
        crashes, the transaction of each connection is rolled back:
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > Ok then (About forced wrties - I agree absolutely.), lets make 20
        > threads to write 200 records each, and lets make writes and comits
        every
        > 2secs, that would be 4000 recs, meantime, data would be only
        2000recs,
        > what means, that eveything will be ok, que every 2 secs will become
        empty.
        > Adomas
      • Nando Dessena
        Michele, M Do you know is could be better to use an embedded version M of firebird instead of standard (super server) one for M windows (I am using 1.5.0 on
        Message 3 of 4 , Dec 1, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Michele,

          M> Do you know is could be better to use an embedded version
          M> of firebird instead of standard (super server) one for
          M> windows (I am using 1.5.0 on the plant) ?

          you can certainly get the best insert speed using an embedded
          connection. You might see you can insert more than 1000 records/sec
          easily, but in any case, I wouldn't do without the client memory
          queue.

          Ciao
          --
          Nando Dessena
          http://www.flamerobin.org
          ======================================================
          I support Firebird, I am a Firebird Foundation member!
          Join today at http://www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation
          ======================================================
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.