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.

VFP and ADS Comparison

2 posts in FoxPro Last posting was on 2009-11-17 22:22:42.0Z
Eric Selje Posted on 2009-11-17 21:46:37.0Z
From: "Eric Selje" <eselje@tcgcorp.net>
Newsgroups: Advantage.FoxPro
Subject: VFP and ADS Comparison
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:46:37 -0600
Lines: 28
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1983
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1983
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.197.100.68
Message-ID: <4b03195b@solutions.advantagedatabase.com>
X-Trace: 17 Nov 2009 14:44:59 -0700, 206.197.100.68
Path: solutions.advantagedatabase.com!solutions.advantagedatabase.com!206.197.100.68
Xref: solutions.advantagedatabase.com Advantage.FoxPro:322
Article PK: 1109677

Hi Guys,

I'm trying to compare using ADS vs. straight VFP and what it's impact will
be on our network (hopefully positive). I ran a query 4 times (four
different files) and my results are below. The # of Packets (sniffed using
Wireshark) is much lower with ADS (as expected), but the throughput seems
much lower with ADS causing an overall slower speed of about 25% on average
than VFP. I've experimented with different packsize settings in VFP, to no
avail. Any other ideas?

VFP SQL Direct Advantage Database Server
Campaign Packets Avg. Packet Size Bytes Avg. Bytes/Sec Avg MB/Sec
Packets Avg. Packet Size Bytes Avg. Bytes/Sec Avg MB/Sec Packets Avg.
Packet Size Bytes Avg. Bytes/Sec Avg MB/Sec
24013 41599 8129.441 21,985,644 4,296,521.48 34.372 6639
528.504 8,265,584 657,989.62
5.264 -84.04% -93.50% -62.40% -84.69% -84.69%
24017 28207 8005.626 14,052,819 3,988,429.10 31.907 2917
810.477 3,597,375 999,515.98
7.996 -89.66% -89.88% -74.40% -74.94% -74.94%
24018 236556 9453.83 117,110,517 4,680,257.27 37.442 22261
831.318 27,845,533 1,039,867.60
8.319 -90.59% -91.21% -76.22% -77.78% -77.78%
24027 11078 962.88 6,769,441 588,387.69 4.707 3842
833.387 4,761,968 1,032,942.02 8.264 -65.32% -13.45% -29.65%
75.55% 75.57%


Joachim Duerr (ADS) Posted on 2009-11-17 22:22:42.0Z
From: "Joachim Duerr (ADS)" <jojo.duerr@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: VFP and ADS Comparison
Newsgroups: Advantage.FoxPro
References: <4b03195b@solutions.advantagedatabase.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 23:22:42 +0100
User-Agent: XanaNews/1.19.1.194
X-Face: u2p+</,mb|Ah!x!/qxX5q0t:O~.<1&JzwNHYhSqcviY{~&|iDc"U.Je1A.ZeHR`d;;y#R
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.158.156.101
Message-ID: <4b0321d3@solutions.advantagedatabase.com>
X-Trace: 17 Nov 2009 15:21:07 -0700, 84.158.156.101
Lines: 18
Path: solutions.advantagedatabase.com!solutions.advantagedatabase.com!84.158.156.101
Xref: solutions.advantagedatabase.com Advantage.FoxPro:323
Article PK: 1109675


Eric Selje wrote:

>I'm trying to compare using ADS vs. straight VFP and what it's impact
>will be on our network (hopefully positive). I ran a query 4 times
>(four different files) and my results are below. The # of Packets
>(sniffed using Wireshark) is much lower with ADS (as expected), but
>the throughput seems much lower with ADS causing an overall slower
>speed of about 25% on average than VFP. I've experimented with
>different packsize settings in VFP, to no avail. Any other ideas?

client/server is in most cases slower than local data access if testing
with only one user. Try opening the table from a second machine if it
makes a difference.

--
Joachim Duerr
Advantage Presales
check out my new ADS book on http://www.jd-engineering.de/adsbuch