Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enhance restore performance of GBAK using batch API [CORE5952] #6208

Closed
firebird-issue-importer opened this issue Oct 25, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

Comments

@firebird-issue-importer

Submitted by: @AlexPeshkoff

Is related to CORE5951

When restoring data gbak sends each record to firebird engine one by one. That's not too bad with embedded connection but when network is involved performance losses are dramatic, specially in WAN case. Batch API is designed to solve such problems and should be used in gbak.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

@firebird-issue-importer firebird-issue-importer commented Oct 25, 2018

Modified by: @AlexPeshkoff

assignee: Alexander Peshkov [ alexpeshkoff ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

@firebird-issue-importer firebird-issue-importer commented Oct 25, 2018

Modified by: @AlexPeshkoff

Link: This issue is related to CORE5951 [ CORE5951 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

@firebird-issue-importer firebird-issue-importer commented Oct 25, 2018

Commented by: @AlexPeshkoff

With gbak using batch API performance difference when restoring database using embedded vs. network connection is almost gone - instead at least 2X difference, present even with localhost connections, with batches we have about 5-7% performance difference (also localhost vs. embedded connection). That's obvious result of increasing network packet size.

Improvement did not cause any changes in use of gbak (i.e. no new switches, no changes in old one).

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

@firebird-issue-importer firebird-issue-importer commented Oct 25, 2018

Modified by: @AlexPeshkoff

status: Open [ 1 ] => Resolved [ 5 ]

resolution: Fixed [ 1 ]

Fix Version: 4.0 Alpha 1 [ 10731 ]

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

@firebird-issue-importer firebird-issue-importer commented Oct 25, 2018

Commented by: @aafemt

Sending of backup stream to services API can be even more effective and also doesn't require any changes in switches, etc.

@firebird-issue-importer
Copy link
Author

@firebird-issue-importer firebird-issue-importer commented Oct 25, 2018

Commented by: @AlexPeshkoff

I agree it's very efficient - I've specially added intermediate buffer for that stream in services manager. But doesn't require any changes in switches? What about -se switch? And dividing database name in 2 parts?

To be precise IBatch is first step in this direction, in next FB version we plan to have pipe interface which will not be limited with JDBC restrictions and will provide exactly same performance as services do now but available for generic usage, not only backups.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants