[firebird-support] Issue with Database Cache Size on FB 3.0
Hi All
We are having trouble setting up the database cache size on FB 3.0
running on Windows 2008 R2 64 bits with 32 GB ram.
The problem we have is we cannot get the server to allocate the ram for
the cache as we intend. With FB 2.54 we had the DB cache set very high,
close to 1 GB per database, all running in RAM memory. With FB 3.0 we
read it can allocate much more RAM to the cache, but it appears the
server is allocating very small amount of Ram when the first user
connects to the DB, and as we connect more users to the DB the ram
consumption increases slowly. The setting we are playing with are:
On firebird.conf
FileSystemCacheThreshold = 0
FileSystemCacheSize = 17179869184 (this is 16 GB - the server has 32 GB
ram.)
On databases.conf
MyTestDB = c:\Temp\MyDb.fdb
{
DefaultDbCachePages = 458752
}
Any ideas what could be wrong? Or what settings would give us maximum
RAM usage for the DB cache (we dont want file system cache meaning HDD
cache, we want to have the DB in RAM for the purpose of reading the DB)
Cheers,
Fabian
[firebird-support] Risks - Experience and doubts regarding upgrading to FB 3.0 from 2.54?
Hi Again We are about to upgrade from Windows 2008 FB 2.54 64 bits into Windows 2012 R2 FB 3.0 64 bits, and would appreciate comments from experienced DB administrators. We use FB as the main DB, and we access it via 32 bit native ODBC (the latest version of Firebird ODBC). I would appreciate if someone can give us a list of risks associated with the upgrade upfront, I have read other posts where some issues were experienced such as having to convert Stored Procedures and triggers and views, but I am not sure why would that be, in our case we did a test conversion to 3.0 and all SPs and Triggers and Views recompiled with no issues, so I am not really sure if we are missing something or in our case the problem does not apply because we have always used standard SQL 92 when writting SPs and Triggers. Also any upfront advise would be highly appreciated. >From our point of view what we are after with the upgrade is: 1) Get parallel requests to be assigned to different CPUs, improving performance when a big process is being executed by another user. 2) Be able to execute backups excluding some tables ( we read this is a new feature) 3) Be able to use Nbackup very often, like every 20 minutes, without killing the performance of the database, as it would run on an isolated processor, we understand the HDD would still be under the pump, but we estimate other system users will not be as affected as on FB 2.54 because of the SMP feature. 4) DB encryption, we are planning to use this feature 5) Communications encryption, we are also planning to use this feature. 6) More DB pages into ram cache under 64 bit server, we would like to dedicate 96 GB ram to the DB cache, under FB 2.54 the limit was 131071 DB pages at 16KB each page, meaning 2GB ram per database. Any comments are highly appreciated! Cheers Fabian
[firebird-support] Is Firebird 3 ready for Production?
Hi All We have a multi-user, multi-company, cloud based system running with Firebird 2.54 as the main database, with about 100 concurrent connections. We are considering migrating to FB 3.0 to take advantaje of the SMP architecture, we have a 32 core / processors server, so we are hopping to see an increased performance. We also have the need to set up online replication. Would anyone be able to advise if it it too soon to jump into FB 3.0 for production? And if the performance increase would be enough to make the upgrade worth considering 3.0 has not been around for long yet, and may be "taking too much risk" to move into it so soon? And regarding the replication, any advise on what product may be the right choice? Cheers Fabian
[firebird-support] Re: ODP: FB 3 issues with String from FB 2.54
liviuslivius liviuslivius poczta.onet.pl [firebird-support] yahoogroups.com> writes: > > > > > > > hi, > > will be good to know which charsets did you tried. utf8, none, octets... > > but remember to connet to db also with this charset settings > > regards, > Karol Bieniaszewski > Oryginalna wiadomość Od: "fabianch itbizolutions.com.au [firebird-support]" yahoogroups.com> Data: 23.05.2016 03:45 (GMT+01:00) Do: firebird- support yahoogroups.com Temat: [firebird-support] FB 3 issues with String from FB 2.54 > > > > > > > > Hi All > > I have been trying to migrate from FB2.54 into FB 3 for a few weeks, and after hitting a string related error for some time i have got to the point where I do understand the issue, but I don't know how to solve it. The issue is pretty simple, the FB 2.54 DB contains a few characters that are not allowed into the FB 3 database, one example of a character causing an error during the restore was "Mcgarrity’s" (note the ’) as it appears to be outside the scope of the FB3 string domain, I have trying creating a new FB3 DB with many different charsets but none works. The other string causing issues is for example "΢ÈíÑźÚ", I have many records with this type of strings because the DB contains raw emails received by the system, stored into Varchars, and apparently some emails contain very weird characters, all were handled by FB2.54 but FB3 rejects the records. I have been able to isolate all recrods with issues using IBExpert's table data comparer function, as it created a script with all recrods from all tables from FB2.54 and when running the script against FB3.0 it singles out all the offending records. > > Can anyone advise what options I have available to force FB3.0 to accept any stuff into string fields? > > > Thanks in advanced > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Karol After playing with the problem for a while I noticed the definition of the field was Varchar (8192) charset ASCII collate ASCII, so that was probably causing the problem. I changed the domain settings to be Charset NONE, Collate NONE, and that fixed the issue! Cheers, Fabian
