Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

C++ trigger container performance

2 posts in Trigger Last posting was on 2008-03-07 17:47:35.0Z
m.sneijders Posted on 2008-02-11 15:07:12.0Z
Reply-To: "m.sneijders" <info@florisoft.nl>
From: "m.sneijders" <martijn@florisoft.nl>
Newsgroups: advantage.trigger
Subject: C++ trigger container performance
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:07:12 +0100
Lines: 16
Organization: Florisoft B.V.
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.84.37.220
Message-ID: <47b06356@solutions.advantagedatabase.com>
X-Trace: 11 Feb 2008 08:01:42 -0700, 213.84.37.220
Path: solutions.advantagedatabase.com!solutions.advantagedatabase.com!213.84.37.220
Xref: solutions.advantagedatabase.com Advantage.Trigger:364
Article PK: 1136426

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone has experience with C++ trigger containers and its
performance. I created a c++ dll exporting a 'MyTrigger', simply returning
0, and no further actions.

Attaching this trigger to a table with +/- 50.000 records as "AFTER UPDATE",
make a update query take 35 secs. Without this trigger it takes just 2 secs.

Using local server on the same machine, it takes 5 secs with trigger.

Is this normal behavior, or am I doing something wrong?

thanks for any reply.


Alex Wong (ADS) Posted on 2008-03-07 17:47:35.0Z
From: "Alex Wong \(ADS\)" <nobody@sybase.com>
Newsgroups: advantage.trigger
References: <47b06356@solutions.advantagedatabase.com>
Subject: Re: C++ trigger container performance
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 10:47:35 -0700
Lines: 37
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.24.38.219
Message-ID: <47d17e67@solutions.advantagedatabase.com>
X-Trace: 7 Mar 2008 10:41:59 -0700, 10.24.38.219
Path: solutions.advantagedatabase.com!solutions.advantagedatabase.com!10.24.38.219
Xref: solutions.advantagedatabase.com Advantage.Trigger:370
Article PK: 1136430

Hi,

I did some testing and found similar result. The extra time are the overhead
from using the trigger. If you divide 35 second by 50000, then the overhead
for each update is only about 0.7ms. I found that you can reduce the
overhead by doing the following:

1) Do not use implicit transaction for the trigger. Using transaction will
cause the transaction log file to be created.
2) Disable DLL caching. Do the following command in ARC after connected to
the database "execute procedure sp_modifydatabase( 'DISABLE_DLL_CACHING',
'TRUE' );"

--
Alex Wong
Advantage R&D

"m.sneijders" <martijn@florisoft.nl> wrote in message
news:47b06356@solutions.advantagedatabase.com...
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if anyone has experience with C++ trigger containers and
> its performance. I created a c++ dll exporting a 'MyTrigger', simply
> returning 0, and no further actions.
>
> Attaching this trigger to a table with +/- 50.000 records as "AFTER
> UPDATE", make a update query take 35 secs. Without this trigger it takes
> just 2 secs.
>
> Using local server on the same machine, it takes 5 secs with trigger.
>
> Is this normal behavior, or am I doing something wrong?
>
> thanks for any reply.
>