Hi Zoltan,
this problem is often topic here.
Solving this problem is a long boring process, where community will try
to explain you basics about transactions and transaction markers
meaning, ask you to send gstat statistics, then explain about record
versioning and garbage and long-running
Hi Alexey,
I've sent a mail directly to You about this particular case asking for
personal assistance.
Any suggestions or hints are welcome if someone else is willing to
participate.
Best Regards
Zsolt
2014-02-11 9:58 GMT+01:00 Alexey Kovyazin a...@ib-aid.com:
Hi Zoltan,
this problem is
- fb_lock_print displays the following about the database:
LOCK_HEADER BLOCK
Version: 145, Active owner: 0, Length: 2097152, Used: 1335440
Flags: 0x0001
Enqs: 9993237, Converts: 93191, Rejects: 1417230, Blocks: 2
Deadlock scans: 0, Deadlocks:
Hi Alexey,
Thanks for the answer. I'll look at our options regarding the professional
services.
Regards,
Zoltan
PS: I am familiar with database concepts like MVCC, transactions, locking
and query execution planning but unfortunately I don't know how to
investigate these mechanisms within
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the answer.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Paul Beach pabe...@waitrose.com wrote:
- How should the output of fb_lock_print interpreted in this case? Are
these numbers wrong in some sense? Can they be improved by some
parameter tuning?
Rejects = Lock requests that
I have a strange slowdown problem with a Firebird database. During the
daily use of the database the clients experience significant slowdowns
while the system still have lots of resources available. Some
information about the environment:
- 64 bit Firebird 2.5.2 server running in SuperServer
2.5 should behave pretty well on SMP systems, at least according to the
release notes. Windows task manager shows that CPU load is distributed
among the available cores. Am I missing something here?
On Feb 11, 2014 8:15 PM, Thomas Steinmaurer t...@iblogmanager.com wrote:
I have a strange
2.5 should behave pretty well on SMP systems, at least according to the
release notes. Windows task manager shows that CPU load is distributed
among the available cores. Am I missing something here?
Then you are not using SuperServer, or SuperServer not serving a single
database but several
I have one fbserver.exe. I have multiple databases though, one with high
load, the others with very low load .
On Feb 11, 2014 8:34 PM, Thomas Steinmaurer t...@iblogmanager.com wrote:
2.5 should behave pretty well on SMP systems, at least according to the
release notes. Windows task manager
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mezei Zoltan
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:14 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Firebird slowdowns while resources are available
I have one fbserver.exe. I
I have one fbserver.exe. I have multiple databases though, one with high
load, the others with very low load .
fbserver.exe = SuperServer (SS).
With several databases, the CPU utilization makes sense then, even under
SuperServer. But still, SuperClassic or Classic might even utilize the
CPU
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Mezei Zoltan mezei.zol...@gmail.comwrote:
Rejects = Lock requests that cannot be satisfied no big deal
\
Slightly more specifically, (IIRC) they're requests to convert a lock from
read to write without releasing the read lock. That happens to prevent
Hi,
I have a strange slowdown problem with a Firebird database. During the
daily use of the database the clients experience significant slowdowns
while the system still have lots of resources available. Some
information about the environment:
- 64 bit Firebird 2.5.2 server running in SuperServer
13 matches
Mail list logo
