+1
> Hey Alexey
> First of all, thanks for all the help. Second, have you or anyone else
> working professional with Firebird thought about writing a book about
> Firebird optimisation - I would for sure buy a copy.
>
>
>
On 11/13/19 9:51 AM, blackfalconsoftw...@outlook.com [firebird-support]
wrote:
>
> Thank you Anne, for your succinct comments regarding the differences
> between the efficiencies of a CHAR and VARCHAR field definitions.
>
> Human observation cannot actually elicit any observable effects
>
Thank you, that is the correct answer. When I tried with embedded Firebird,
that doesn't use the services manager, it works fine, with either way of
accessing the network drive (UNC path or mapped drive letter).
Feeling a bit dumb. :)
13.11.2019 21:06, kragh.tho...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> Just to clarify, one could make a RAM drive with tmpfs, eg /ramdrive, and
> then specify
> this path in firebird.config under "TempDirectories"?
Not quite.
> If correctly understood, does this provide any benefits over
Hey Dimitry Just to clarify, one could make a RAM drive with tmpfs, eg
/ramdrive, and then specify this path in firebird.config under
"TempDirectories"?
If correctly understood, does this provide any benefits over just allocation
more memory for TempCacheLimit, under Firebird 3?
Thomas
Hey Alexey First of all, thanks for all the help. Second, have you or anyone
else working professional with Firebird thought about writing a book about
Firebird optimisation - I would for sure buy a copy.
Hi all,
I have recently run into INET/inet_error: fork/CreateProcess errno = 5 error in
one of my Firebird boxes and I was wondering if anyone could help me with
understanding what it actually means.
I have several identical Windows Server machines running Firebird 2.1.3 64-bit
in Classic
I'm developing a new updater for my application that uses a Firebird database.
My old version was using the gbak tool for backup and restore the
database (in a secondary FDB). If the backup and restore was finishing
with success, I acsume that the database integrity is OK.
The problem is that
Recently I ran a "Database statistics" with ibexpert on one of our dbs, and
there were a lot of tables marked in yellow, with the tooltip saying "Table
xxx Is fragmented"
I couldn't quite find an explanation for it online, so I have a few doubts
about it:
* Is this the same as index
13.11.2019 18:42, blackfalconsoftw...@outlook.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> So my understanding of how the VARCHAR field works is correct and what I have
> stated earlier.
Your understanding is wrong and either IB Expert site is wrong as well or
you misread it.
Yest remember: CHAR -
13.11.2019 18:53, dco...@sympatico.ca [firebird-support] wrote:
> We're actually already doing the backups and restores with the Services API.
Usually account used to run Firebird server has no access to network at all.
Thus the
error you see.
--
WBR, SD.
We're actually already doing the backups and restores with the Services API.
Here is the link to the definition of CHAR and VARCHAR field definitions from
the IB-Experts site...
https://www.ibexpert.net/ibe/index.php?n=Doc.CHAR
https://www.ibexpert.net/ibe/index.php?n=Doc.CHAR
It defines the storing of CHAR and VARCHAR in the same manner, though the
VARCHAR data
13.11.2019 17:37, blackfalconsoftw...@outlook.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> Your statement is suggesting a null length (until the field is updated) with
> two bytes for
> an actual length, which is how VARCHAR fields work in all other databases to
> my
> knowledge. Otherwise, to follow the
Your statement, which may be true, does not sit well with a previous statement
that states that a VARCHAR field of 1000 characters is stored in the table with
1000 characters.
Your statement is suggesting a null length (until the field is updated) with
two bytes for an actual length, which
> On Nov 13, 2019, at 10:01 AM, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com
> [firebird-support] wrote:
>
> 13.11.2019 15:51, blackfalconsoftw...@outlook.com [firebird-support] wrote:
>> However, internally, the CHAR field definition is more efficient as the
>> database does not
>> have to
13.11.2019 16:45, dco...@sympatico.ca [firebird-support] wrote:
> Whether I used a mapped drive letter, or a UNC path, if I try to restore a
> backup from a
> network drive it fails, with a message like "Cannot open file".
Don't you by chance try it using Services API or "-se" switch of
13.11.2019 16:09, blackfalconsoftw...@outlook.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> If a VARCHAR field is defined for 1000 characters and it is stored in the
> table at a 1000
> character length than there is no purpose to an actual VARCHAR field
> definition.
There is. I addition to 1000
Whether I used a mapped drive letter, or a UNC path, if I try to restore a
backup from a network drive it fails, with a message like "Cannot open file".
I fully understand why Firebird won't open a database file on a network drive,
but I'm trying to do the restore to a DB on a local drive.
Though I cannot dispute what you are saying, to me it does not make much sense.
If a VARCHAR field is defined for 1000 characters and it is stored in the
table at a 1000 character length than there is no purpose to an actual VARCHAR
field definition.
VARCHAR fields have always been
Hello Karol,
thank you, that was the one piece I was looking for, the right position for the
listing.
Best thanks.
Regards.
Olaf
Von: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. November 2019 09:51
An: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Betreff: Re: AW:
13.11.2019 15:51, blackfalconsoftw...@outlook.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> However, internally, the CHAR field definition is more efficient as the
> database does not
> have to perform any field size calculations at the moment that data is being
> updated to a
> VARCHAR field.
No such
Thank you Anne, for your succinct comments regarding the differences between
the efficiencies of a CHAR and VARCHAR field definitions.
Human observation cannot actually elicit any observable effects between the
two.
However, internally, the CHAR field definition is more efficient as
13.11.2019 15:07, Clyde Eisenbeis cte...@gmail.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> Assume I have two fields => "stFixed CHAR(10)" and "stVar VARCHAR(8191)
> CHARACTER SET
> UTF8" --- what is the optimum pageSize?
As big as possible for your Firebird version.
--
WBR, SD.
Thanks for the useful responses!
Assume I have two fields => "stFixed CHAR(10)" and "stVar VARCHAR(8191)
CHARACTER SET UTF8" --- what is the optimum pageSize?
```
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:17 AM Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com
[firebird-support] wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > On
Hello,
For predictable load reads/fetches is very useful metric, but in case of
spikes like Thomas has - 96 connections to 1300, it will be far less useful.
Regards,
Alexey
On 13.11.2019 14:50, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com
[firebird-support] wrote:
> 13.11.2019 12:41, Alexey Kovyazin
Hello,
Yes, better use default - pagecache in terms of Linux is different from
Page Buffers/Page cache of Firebird.
Regards,
Alexey
On 13.11.2019 15:10, kragh.tho...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote:
Hey Alexey
Thanks for the answer, I only have one question left, do I need to
adjust
> On Nov 12, 2019, at 10:44 PM, Richard Damon rich...@damon-family.org
> [firebird-support] wrote:
>
>> On 11/12/19 12:38 PM, cte...@gmail.com [firebird-support] wrote:
>>
>>
>> What are the trade-offs of CHAR vs. VARCHAR? I know that VARCHAR
>> consumes less space. Anything thing else
Hey Alexey Thanks for the answer, I only have one question left, do I need to
adjust linux page cache(vm.pagecache) according to amount of RAM allocated for
DefaultDBCachePages, so that memory is not over "subscribed"? Eg. if
DefaultDBCachePages is increased should i then decrease
13.11.2019 12:41, Alexey Kovyazin a...@ib-aid.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> we also started with Page Buffers = 25% RAM and increased it step by step
> (and still
> continue to work with fine tuning).
Isn't it better to use cache hit ratio to make the decision about its growth?
--
Hello Thomas,
Ok, good to know that you are prepared for the migration! FB3 with
proper migration and config certainly will increase the overall performance.
In my presentation regarding Linux I spoke about specific case which is
under everyday control, and in our long way, we also started
On 2019-11-12 23:06, Clyde Eisenbeis cte...@gmail.com [firebird-support]
wrote:
> As I understand, the FbConnection.CreateDatabase max pageSize for
> VARCHAR is 8191. Does the page size change to less than 8191 if the
> VARCHAR is less?
>
> What is the max pageSize for CHAR?
Page size is about
13.11.2019 01:14, 'Andrew Zenz' and...@aimsoftware.com.au [firebird-support]
wrote:
> I recently installed Firebird Client (2.5.8) and Firebird ODBC drivers
> (2.0.5) on a
> clients RDS server and was told I had broken a previously installed app that
> appears to
> use FB Embedded.
>
> The
13.11.2019 11:59, kragh.tho...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote:
> Its not that I see high traffic to /tmp as a problem, I was just worried that
> it was
> becoming a bottleneck in our system.
In this case you can use for it tempfs backed up with auto-expanded swap
files.
--
WBR,
Hey Alexey Its not that I see high traffic to /tmp as a problem, I was just
worried that it was becoming a bottleneck in our system. Great to know that
HQbird has a way of tracking these qureys, I have already been looking into
HQbird especially because of prepared statements.
Regarding the
Hello Thomas,
My advice was only to fix the obvious mistake regarding the TempCacheLimit.
In general, I don't see a problem in high traffic to /tmp, and I don't
understand why do you think sorting queries produce the problem - and
even if they produce, the first attempt would be to identify
Hey Alexey Thanks for the advise, I changed TempCacheLimit to 21, last
night and it looks like it had a positive effect on the disk queue size on sda.
I have read a lot about Firebird tuning however I have never come across that
limit on fb 2.5
https://pasteboard.co/IGsU650A.png
Hi,
from your description i really do not know what is working for you and what is
not working.
And your expectation.
but to understand recursive CTE look at simple sample. Recursive CTE work
throught tree.
### metadata ###
CREATE TABLE
Sorry, I don't want to annoy, but can I do this with a separate
list-function or is it possible to realize it with new functions in firebird
4?
TA TB
A B B is a part from A
A C C is a part from A
A D D is a part from A
D X X is a part
39 matches
Mail list logo
