![]() | ![]() Products ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Home » Technical Support » ElevateDB Technical Support » Support Forums » ElevateDB General » View Thread |
Messages 1 to 9 of 9 total |
![]() |
Mon, May 26 2008 12:50 PM | Permanent Link |
Uli Becker | This query normally takes about 0.5 seconds:
select R.* from Rechnungen R left outer join Patienten P on R.PatientenID = P.PatientenID where P.name like 'beck%'; After changing the database folder in the config-file from g:\daten\myfolder to \\edv1\g\daten\myfolder (both directories are on the same machine) the same query needs about 9 seconds to execute. Is this a bug? Regards Uli |
Mon, May 26 2008 1:02 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Uli,
<< Is this a bug? >> Yeah, but it sounds like an MS one. ![]() their OS's and performance when using UNC paths to access data. What OS's are involved on both ends (client and file server) ? Thanks, -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 26 2008 2:09 PM | Permanent Link |
Uli Becker | Tim
> Yeah, but it sounds like an MS one. ![]() > their OS's and performance when using UNC paths to access data. What OS's > are involved on both ends (client and file server) ? XP Professional SP2. It's just the same machine for both ends. |
Mon, May 26 2008 2:23 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Uli,
<< XP Professional SP2. It's just the same machine for both ends. >> Ahh, in that case the issue is simply that using UNC makes the requests go through the network redirector, which slows things down a bit. They supposedly fixed this in W2K, but like the file read/memory usage issue, it probably didn't get fixed: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/328252 -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 26 2008 2:45 PM | Permanent Link |
"Uli Becker" | > Ahh, in that case the issue is simply that using UNC makes the requests go
> through the network redirector, which slows things down a bit. But it's not a bit, it takes 10 times longer. Does that mean that using an UNC path in EDB makes the database unusable? Uli |
Mon, May 26 2008 2:51 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Uli,
<< But it's not a bit, it takes 10 times longer. Does that mean that using an UNC path in EDB makes the database unusable? >> No, it means that using a UNC path for a *local* drive is slower than using a direct drive letter because it has to go through the network redirector. I didn't design this Uli, Microsoft did. We have to live with whatever they choose to do. Did you actually try using a UNC path for database on a different machine and comparing to a mapped drive letter ? There should be no difference between the two for drives that aren't local. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 26 2008 3:03 PM | Permanent Link |
"Uli Becker" | > I didn't design this Uli, Microsoft did. We have to live with whatever
> they choose to do. I know ![]() > Did you actually try using a UNC path for database on a different machine > and comparing to a mapped drive letter ? There should be no difference > between the two for drives that aren't local. I didn't try that till now. The reason why I used the unc path is that I am storing the config-file for all databases on one machine. Since I can switch from local to remote access in my application, the unc-path is necessary. Though this is only necessary for testing. Later there will be no need to use anyhting but the remote access. Btw: the performance even using a slow WLAN is great using the EDB-server. Thanks. Uli |
Mon, May 26 2008 4:47 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. ![]() | Uli,
<< The reason why I used the unc path is that I am storing the config-file for all databases on one machine. Since I can switch from local to remote access in my application, the unc-path is necessary. Though this is only necessary for testing. Later there will be no need to use anyhting but the remote access. >> Are you actually using a file-sharing, multi-user setup ? If not, then you can just use drive letters all around since you only need to specify the path names in terms of the current machine. << Btw: the performance even using a slow WLAN is great using the EDB-server. >> Yeah, it seems that the new bi-directional caching for cursors is working really well for remote sessions over a really slow connection. I think I'm going to put up an ActiveX control on the web site that demonstrates an Internet connection and table browser with a demo ElevateDB Server running on our server. -- Tim Young Elevate Software www.elevatesoft.com |
Mon, May 26 2008 4:56 PM | Permanent Link |
Uli Becker | Tim,
> Are you actually using a file-sharing, multi-user setup ? If not, then you > can just use drive letters all around since you only need to specify the > path names in terms of the current machine. Yes, that's clear for me. > Yeah, it seems that the new bi-directional caching for cursors is working > really well for remote sessions over a really slow connection. I think I'm > going to put up an ActiveX control on the web site that demonstrates an > Internet connection and table browser with a demo ElevateDB Server running > on our server. Great idea. Looking forward to that. Uli |
This web page was last updated on Wednesday, July 2, 2025 at 06:46 PM | Privacy Policy![]() © 2025 Elevate Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved Questions or comments ? ![]() |