Many thanks for the detailed explanation, Vlad. It all makes sense now.
> I'm not sure FB 2.1.x could correctly work with 32K+ records. But i
> can be
> wrong, i don't remember exactly. Could you check it with FB 2.5 ?
>
>
> FB2.5 works fine with 32K+ rows, and only has problems when the row
just returns nothing. Is this a known
limitation? I couldn't find this mentioned in any documentation.
We are running Firebird 2.1.2 64bit Classic Server on Centos 6.
On 14 September 2013 19:24, Huan Ruan wrote:
>
>
> Hi All
>>
>> We are trying to implement a bulk d
Hi All
>
> We are trying to implement a bulk data importer by writing our own
> external table files. We've tried storing all fields as text, but due to
> the volume of data, this put us well over the 2GB external file size limit
> in Firebird 2.1. So we've resorted to saving the files in Firebird'
Hi All
We are trying to implement a bulk data importer by writing our own external
table files. We've tried storing all fields as text, but due to the volume
of data, this put us well over the 2GB external file size limit in Firebird
2.1. So we've resorted to saving the files in Firebird's own bin
. Firebird Classic Server.
Reporter: Huan Ruan
While working on upgrading our database from Firebird 2.1.2 to 2.5.1, we found
a query that runs a lot slower in 2.5 than in 2.1. We got the query down to a
minimum to reproduce the issue and the pattern seems to be related to using
derived
