How much does muti-user slow down performance?

How much does muti-user slow down performance?

Post by Fredrik Larsso » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



I am just curious, NT 4 workstations with 16 MB on 100 Mhz pentiums??? They
must be very slow or? I mean Running Windows 95 on P100 16 MB is ok but
just ok not more...

Quote:> Using Delphi 2.01, BDE 3.5, Paradox ver 7 tables, NT 4.0 Server with 64M
> 166MHz Pentium, NT 4.0 Workstations with 16M 100MHz Pentium, 10 Base T:

 
 
 

How much does muti-user slow down performance?

Post by Sundial Servic » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>I am just curious, NT 4 workstations with 16 MB on 100 Mhz pentiums??? They
>must be very slow or? I mean Running Windows 95 on P100 16 MB is ok but
>just ok not more...
>> Using Delphi 2.01, BDE 3.5, Paradox ver 7 tables, NT 4.0 Server with 64M
>> 166MHz Pentium, NT 4.0 Workstations with 16M 100MHz Pentium, 10 Base T:

Telling me how fast an individual computer runs, or how many resources it
owns, tells me nothing at all of how it will perform on a multi-user
situation.  One must take for granted that a multi-user database is I/O bound
rather than CPU bound.  

 
 
 

How much does muti-user slow down performance?

Post by lhirsc » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


The computer runs fine except when doing I/O.  No performance problem.
It is interesting to note that when I boot my server under Win 95, the
problem all but goes away with only slight performance degredation.

Lance



> >I am just curious, NT 4 workstations with 16 MB on 100 Mhz pentiums??? They
> >must be very slow or? I mean Running Windows 95 on P100 16 MB is ok but
> >just ok not more...

> >> Using Delphi 2.01, BDE 3.5, Paradox ver 7 tables, NT 4.0 Server with 64M
> >> 166MHz Pentium, NT 4.0 Workstations with 16M 100MHz Pentium, 10 Base T:

> Telling me how fast an individual computer runs, or how many resources it
> owns, tells me nothing at all of how it will perform on a multi-user
> situation.  One must take for granted that a multi-user database is I/O bound
> rather than CPU bound.

 
 
 

1. How much does muti-user slow down performance?

When user-1 opens the table the second time, he can tell by looking at the
update counter that no one has changed the table therefore any cached copies
are good.  Otherwise the data must be retrieved again.

What you need to do is to look at your algorithm.  For example, keep the
tables open.  Do a batch of updates at a time, protected by one table-lock,
instead of relying on record-locking each time.  

In a file-server system especially, *communication* is often the bottleneck.  
In your scenario a lot of data is passing over the wire each time.  There are
a lot of directory-searches, file operations etc. being performed.

So, it -is- your coding technique.  I suspect that if you put your mind to it
you can get those eight minutes back.

/mr/

2. Can you explain storage parameters

3. license muti-users vs one-user ?

4. Informix Net and Macintosh

5. Performance Slow Down

6. table locks in A97 and SQL7

7. why does NT slows down performance

8. Need Context Preprocessor and Database Engine

9. Index on table slow down performance extremly

10. SQL-Server slows down disk performance

11. Analyze Table Compute Statistics but slowed down performance ??

12. Index on table slow down performance extremly

13. Expand SGA but performance slow down?