I don't have a lot of experience with sql-server, but too many indexes
or not enough free space in the data blocks can greatly slow down
inserts and updates in an RDBMS. Oracle stored procedures can be slow
(any dynamic sql can be slow because it is interpreted over and over);
don't know about sql-server.
We load data from our 3000 into Oracle by a pro*c program written by
a good C programmer with limited SQL experience, and it is usually
pretty fast.
Richard
Mark Boyd wrote:
>
> The rdbms is sql server/2000.
> It's a simple app really, actually two.
> The first app reads an image log file, determines if the transaction is an
> insert, update or delete then formats the transaction into the proper type
> of sql statement and writes it into a Microsoft Message queue. The second
> app (this is the slow one) creates a child process for each queue (currently
> 14) to be read, each child reads a transaction out of the queue and executes
> it. Simpler I couldn't imagine or at least on paper it's too simple to
> implement poorly. Both apps are written in vb6 and make extensive use of
> stored procs.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Gambrell [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 4:38 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Expensive RDBM Systems (Oracle)
>
> Mark Boyd wrote:
> >
> > "it is simpler to use than Image"
> >
> > A BIGGER crock of Crapola(tm), I haven't heard since my wedding vows.
> > NOTHING is easier to use than Image.
>
> Each to his/her own, but from what I've observed, the basic
> concepts of SQL and it's syntax are easier to learn to use for
> data adds, updates, and retrievals. Advanced ideas and proprietary
> extensions are another story. Oracle is far, far, harder to
> administer than an Image database. I'm specifically addressing
> the question of programming an application when I claim that SQL
> is simpler to use.
>
> Image has a SQL interface. How many people use it? Why or Why not?
>
> >
> > "the cost/performance "curve" seems to be favoring SQL more and more"
> >
> > A bigger crock of Crapola(tm), I haven't heard since someone said "SQL was
> > simpler to use than Image". The only performance curve I've seen with SPL
> is
> > downward. I'm currently babysitting an SQL app that is averaging 3
> > transactions per second with a maximum speed of 194 transactions per
> second.
> > These are inserts, updates and deletes that are transferred from our hp.
> > Our pimply-faced gurus downstairs have upgraded the server, rebuilt the
> > server, reinstalled the software, upgraded the software and can't get any
> > more speed out of it.
> >
>
> Is this on Oracle? Poorly written applications can be written in
> any language and use any DBMS (or other data storage). Sounds like
> your "gurus" aren't really analyzing the source of the problem and
> instead are just throwing things at the problem. A missing index,
> badly written SQL queries, and insufficient database buffers can kill
> Oracle performance, just like a missing key, a bad strategy for
> retrieval, or insufficient memory can kill Image performance.
>
> Believe me, I've had my fill of badly written RDBMS applications,
> too. The hp3000-l archives contain messages about our observations
> of performance comparisons. A statement job that take hours on
> Oracle vs minutes on MPE.
>
> The real question is how hard it is to learn to design and write
> reasonably performing applications using SQL vs using Image, plus the
> cost of the hardware needed for equivalent performance. How hard
> is it to get reasonable web applications up and running.
>
> Richard
>
> > * Crapola is a registered trademark of Microsoft Inc.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Gambrell [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 3:28 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Expensive RDBM Systems (Oracle)
> >
> > "James B. Byrne" wrote:
> > >
> > > On 7 Mar 2001, at 15:41, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> > >
> > > > This has actually been a 25-year-long running argument. Personally,
> > > > I'm on both sides of the argument at the same time and could argue the
> > > > merits on either side with equal conviction.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is the same with me. But recently I have begun to lean more and
> > > more to the data management side.
> > >
> >
> > This is a fruit to vegetables type of comparison. At the core, we
> > need a strong file system supported by the operating system,
> > then a transaction management journalizing system,
> > then a database system,
> > then a data management/dictionary system, etc.
> > MPE has the first 3, but the data management layer is weak.
> >
> > However, we also have a world that knows SQL, maybe not well, but
> > nonetheless it is simpler to use than Image. With cheaper hardware
> > and more expensive programmers, the cost/performance "curve"
> > seems to be favoring SQL more and more. Poor SQL coding can
> > bring a system to it's knees, but so can poor Image coding or
> > design.
> >
> > Note that Oracle offers a number of data management features
> > on top of the database, but you pay a *lot* for these features.
> >
> > Note that things like stored procedures and triggers are
> > proprietary (pl/sql), just like Image calls.
> > SQL is not proprietary.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> > > Regards,
> > > Jim
> > > --- *** e-mail is not a secure channel ***
> > > James B. Byrne Harte & Lyne Limited
> > > vox: +1 905 561 1241 9 Brockley Drive
> > > fax: +1 905 561 0757 Hamilton, Ontario
> > > mailto:[log in to unmask] Canada L8E 3C3
> >
> > --
> > Richard L Gambrell, Director of Computing Systems and Networks
> > Information Technology Division
> > University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
> > 103 Hunter Hall, Department Code 4454
> > 615 McCallie Ave., Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598
> > voice mail/cell phone: 423-432-5122
> > private e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> > UTC fax: 423-755-4150
> > UTC phone: 423-755-4551
> > UTC email: [log in to unmask]
>
> --
> Richard L Gambrell, Director of Computing Systems and Networks
> Information Technology Division
> University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
> 103 Hunter Hall, Department Code 4454
> 615 McCallie Ave., Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598
> voice mail/cell phone: 423-432-5122
> private e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> UTC fax: 423-755-4150
> UTC phone: 423-755-4551
> UTC email: [log in to unmask]
--
Richard L Gambrell, Director of Computing Systems and Networks
Information Technology Division
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
103 Hunter Hall, Department Code 4454
615 McCallie Ave., Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598
voice mail/cell phone: 423-432-5122
private e-mail: [log in to unmask]
UTC fax: 423-755-4150
UTC phone: 423-755-4551
UTC email: [log in to unmask]
|
