I have just upsized a FoxPro DB to MSDE.
I use a VB 6 program with ADO to access the DB.
I put the .EXE file on the server with a shortcut to it on each of the
workstations.
Performance is much worse then the FoxPro in some of the tasks.
In my investigations I found that if I put the .EXE on each workstation
performance improved 10 fold.
Can anyone explain why this happened? I would like to only have to have one
version of the .EXE floating around.
Thanks,
Darwin C. Weyh
swdev at superiorheattreat dot com
And for the spammers: dweyh@.weyh.net
The first question I would pose is:
Are you using a client side or server side cursor in your calls to the
database? Also, is your database on a network server? If so, why are you
using MSDE, why not a full blown version of SQL Server? I would guess it
would be possible to place individual instances of MSDE on local machines
which were in essence copies of each other, but it sounds convoluted.
Jamie
"Darwin Weyh" wrote:
> I have just upsized a FoxPro DB to MSDE.
> I use a VB 6 program with ADO to access the DB.
> I put the .EXE file on the server with a shortcut to it on each of the
> workstations.
> Performance is much worse then the FoxPro in some of the tasks.
> In my investigations I found that if I put the .EXE on each workstation
> performance improved 10 fold.
> Can anyone explain why this happened? I would like to only have to have one
> version of the .EXE floating around.
> Thanks,
> --
> Darwin C. Weyh
> swdev at superiorheattreat dot com
> And for the spammers: dweyh@.weyh.net
>
>
|||hi Darwin,
Darwin Weyh wrote:
> I have just upsized a FoxPro DB to MSDE.
> I use a VB 6 program with ADO to access the DB.
> I put the .EXE file on the server with a shortcut to it on each of the
> workstations.
> Performance is much worse then the FoxPro in some of the tasks.
> In my investigations I found that if I put the .EXE on each
> workstation performance improved 10 fold.
> Can anyone explain why this happened? I would like to only have to
> have one version of the .EXE floating around.
> Thanks,
you are actually killing your lan with a lot of unnecessary traffic
(application and data) and using the OSs as a terminal server...
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.11.1 - DbaMgr ver 0.57.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply
|||The MSDE resides on a SBS 2003 machine as did the file served .exe
I'm using server side cursors.
SQL Server cost more.
My original configuration used VFP files on the SBS 2003 server as did the
file served .exe.
And I used client side cursors.
"thejamie" <thejamie@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EF072B21-7200-4D6E-B0A1-430EF776F661@.microsoft.com...[vbcol=seagreen]
> The first question I would pose is:
> Are you using a client side or server side cursor in your calls to the
> database? Also, is your database on a network server? If so, why are you
> using MSDE, why not a full blown version of SQL Server? I would guess it
> would be possible to place individual instances of MSDE on local machines
> which were in essence copies of each other, but it sounds convoluted.
> Jamie
> "Darwin Weyh" wrote:
Showing posts with label msde. Show all posts
Showing posts with label msde. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Performance problem with SQL Server Express
My current database is running in MSDE.I setup a new server and installed SQL Server 2005 Express.I then copied the database to the new server and attached it.After testing the new server, I noticed that one of my stored procedures that uses a forward_only keyset cursor is running about ten times slower.I’ve compared all the setting between the two servers and everything looks good.I also installed a trial copy of SQL Server 2005 on a spare PC and ran the same test.Again, the stored procedure is running about ten times slower.I’m not experiencing any other performance problems.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
You might want to ask this question on the SQL Server Database Engine forum. I don't expect the Express edition to be any different from the standard one for cursor functionality.
Thanks
Laurentiu
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Performance of named instance
Hi,
I have an app that ran just fine with the default instance of MSDE. I
changed the connection string in the app to work with a named instance
instead, like this: (local)/MyNamedInstance.
Database performance slowed measurably as soon as I did that, particularly
with DDL commands, like:
CREATE DEFAULT BOOLEAN_DEFAULT AS ''F''
CREATE RULE BOOLEAN_RULE AS @.list IN (''T'', ''F'')
sp_addtype DOM_BOOLEAN, ''VARCHAR(1)'', ''NOT NULL''
sp_bindefault BOOLEAN_DEFAULT, DOM_BOOLEAN
sp_bindrule BOOLEAN_RULE, DOM_BOOLEAN
It literally takes 10-15 seconds to execute about 4 of these lines of code,
where they used to execute pretty much immediately.
Is there anything special I need to do with a named instance of MSDE to
obtain the same performance levels?
Thanks in advance.
-Eric Harmon
If the instances are on the same machine it is possible that the first
instance has taken the majority of the memory and is still using it. If the
first instance needs the memory it will not free it up for the second
instance.
I have never seen a case where the cause of a performance problem was a
default vs. a named instance, so you need to concentrate on the other
differences; resources available, differences in data, schema differences,
disk speed, etc.
Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
http://cindygross.tripod.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
I have an app that ran just fine with the default instance of MSDE. I
changed the connection string in the app to work with a named instance
instead, like this: (local)/MyNamedInstance.
Database performance slowed measurably as soon as I did that, particularly
with DDL commands, like:
CREATE DEFAULT BOOLEAN_DEFAULT AS ''F''
CREATE RULE BOOLEAN_RULE AS @.list IN (''T'', ''F'')
sp_addtype DOM_BOOLEAN, ''VARCHAR(1)'', ''NOT NULL''
sp_bindefault BOOLEAN_DEFAULT, DOM_BOOLEAN
sp_bindrule BOOLEAN_RULE, DOM_BOOLEAN
It literally takes 10-15 seconds to execute about 4 of these lines of code,
where they used to execute pretty much immediately.
Is there anything special I need to do with a named instance of MSDE to
obtain the same performance levels?
Thanks in advance.
-Eric Harmon
If the instances are on the same machine it is possible that the first
instance has taken the majority of the memory and is still using it. If the
first instance needs the memory it will not free it up for the second
instance.
I have never seen a case where the cause of a performance problem was a
default vs. a named instance, so you need to concentrate on the other
differences; resources available, differences in data, schema differences,
disk speed, etc.
Cindy Gross, MCDBA, MCSE
http://cindygross.tripod.com
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Performance of MSDE Vs. SQL Server 2000
Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
(say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
Thanks
Dom<domtam@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130287729.767464.93730@.g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
> users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
> (say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
> performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
> What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
>
MSDE has no limit on concurrent users. It has a workload governer which
slows down processing when there are more than 5 concurrent workloads (not
users or connections). In addition databases are limited to 2GB each.
Within the limitations of MSDE the performance should be similar.
The replacement for MSDE, SQL Server 2005 Express Edition has no governor or
user limitation, but is limited to using 1GB of ram, 1 processor and
databases are limited to 4GB each.
David
users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
(say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
Thanks
Dom<domtam@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130287729.767464.93730@.g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
> users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
> (say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
> performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
> What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
>
MSDE has no limit on concurrent users. It has a workload governer which
slows down processing when there are more than 5 concurrent workloads (not
users or connections). In addition databases are limited to 2GB each.
Within the limitations of MSDE the performance should be similar.
The replacement for MSDE, SQL Server 2005 Express Edition has no governor or
user limitation, but is limited to using 1GB of ram, 1 processor and
databases are limited to 4GB each.
David
Performance of MSDE Vs. SQL Server 2000
Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
(say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
Thanks
Dom
<domtam@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130287729.767464.93730@.g43g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
> users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
> (say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
> performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
> What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
>
MSDE has no limit on concurrent users. It has a workload governer which
slows down processing when there are more than 5 concurrent workloads (not
users or connections). In addition databases are limited to 2GB each.
Within the limitations of MSDE the performance should be similar.
The replacement for MSDE, SQL Server 2005 Express Edition has no governor or
user limitation, but is limited to using 1GB of ram, 1 processor and
databases are limited to 4GB each.
David
users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
(say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
Thanks
Dom
<domtam@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130287729.767464.93730@.g43g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
> Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
> users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
> (say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
> performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
> What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
>
MSDE has no limit on concurrent users. It has a workload governer which
slows down processing when there are more than 5 concurrent workloads (not
users or connections). In addition databases are limited to 2GB each.
Within the limitations of MSDE the performance should be similar.
The replacement for MSDE, SQL Server 2005 Express Edition has no governor or
user limitation, but is limited to using 1GB of ram, 1 processor and
databases are limited to 4GB each.
David
Performance of MSDE Vs. SQL Server 2000
Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
(say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
Thanks
Dom<domtam@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130287729.767464.93730@.g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
> users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
> (say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
> performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
> What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
>
MSDE has no limit on concurrent users. It has a workload governer which
slows down processing when there are more than 5 concurrent workloads (not
users or connections). In addition databases are limited to 2GB each.
Within the limitations of MSDE the performance should be similar.
The replacement for MSDE, SQL Server 2005 Express Edition has no governor or
user limitation, but is limited to using 1GB of ram, 1 processor and
databases are limited to 4GB each.
David
users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
(say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
Thanks
Dom<domtam@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130287729.767464.93730@.g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi there. I understand that MSDE has limitation such as 25 concurrent
> users. However, under the same number of concurrent user environment
> (say, 1 user) and hardware, is it possible that there will be much
> performance difference between MSDE and SQL Server 2000?
> What if MSDE runs under XP Pro and SQL SErver 2000 under Windows 2000?
>
MSDE has no limit on concurrent users. It has a workload governer which
slows down processing when there are more than 5 concurrent workloads (not
users or connections). In addition databases are limited to 2GB each.
Within the limitations of MSDE the performance should be similar.
The replacement for MSDE, SQL Server 2005 Express Edition has no governor or
user limitation, but is limited to using 1GB of ram, 1 processor and
databases are limited to 4GB each.
David
performance of MSDE
Is anyone aware of any functionally exceptions of the MSDE
version of SQL, other than Microsoft's listed ones, I have
read in user forums that there are also perfomance
knobbling.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...iew/default.as
p
We have the choice of buying a multi-user database with
either an Access or MSDE SQL back end, the supplier is
currently developing the database to use the SQL backend.
We cannot afford to upgrade to the Std version later on.
rob,
I suspect that if the performance of MSDE becomes too slow due to database
throttling that an Access database would also be too slow.
Ginny Caughey
..Net Compact Framework MVP
Have an opinion on the effectiveness of Microsoft Embedded newsgroups?
Let Microsoft know!
https://www.windowsembeddedeval.com/...ity/newsgroups
"rob" <another@.psotago.org.nz> wrote in message
news:22c4d01c45e38$45e45d30$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Is anyone aware of any functionally exceptions of the MSDE
> version of SQL, other than Microsoft's listed ones, I have
> read in user forums that there are also perfomance
> knobbling.
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...iew/default.as
> p
> We have the choice of buying a multi-user database with
> either an Access or MSDE SQL back end, the supplier is
> currently developing the database to use the SQL backend.
> We cannot afford to upgrade to the Std version later on.
|||I assume they are referring to the workload governor:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?u...asp?frame=true
Alan Brewer [MSFT]
Lead Programming Writer
SQL Server Documentation Team
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights
version of SQL, other than Microsoft's listed ones, I have
read in user forums that there are also perfomance
knobbling.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...iew/default.as
p
We have the choice of buying a multi-user database with
either an Access or MSDE SQL back end, the supplier is
currently developing the database to use the SQL backend.
We cannot afford to upgrade to the Std version later on.
rob,
I suspect that if the performance of MSDE becomes too slow due to database
throttling that an Access database would also be too slow.
Ginny Caughey
..Net Compact Framework MVP
Have an opinion on the effectiveness of Microsoft Embedded newsgroups?
Let Microsoft know!
https://www.windowsembeddedeval.com/...ity/newsgroups
"rob" <another@.psotago.org.nz> wrote in message
news:22c4d01c45e38$45e45d30$a601280a@.phx.gbl...
> Is anyone aware of any functionally exceptions of the MSDE
> version of SQL, other than Microsoft's listed ones, I have
> read in user forums that there are also perfomance
> knobbling.
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...iew/default.as
> p
> We have the choice of buying a multi-user database with
> either an Access or MSDE SQL back end, the supplier is
> currently developing the database to use the SQL backend.
> We cannot afford to upgrade to the Std version later on.
|||I assume they are referring to the workload governor:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/?u...asp?frame=true
Alan Brewer [MSFT]
Lead Programming Writer
SQL Server Documentation Team
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)