Thread: Windows performance again

Hello,

We have the next scenario:

Linux box with postgresql 7.2.1-1 (client)
Windows XP with postgresql 8.1.1 (server)
Windows XP with postgresql 8.1.1 (client)

All connected in 10Mb LAN

In server box, we have a table with 65000 rows and usign "psql" we have
these results:

Linux box with psql version 7.2.1 versus Windows XP server:

select * from <table>; -> 7 seconds aprox. to obtain a results.
Network utilization: 100%

Windows XP client box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server:

select * from <table>; -> 60 seconds aprox. to obtain a results!!!!!!!!!!!!
Network utilization: 3%

Windows XP server box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server:

select * from <table>; -> <1 seconds aprox. to obtain a results.
Network utilization: 0%

Is a really problem, because we are migrating a old server to 8.0
version in a windows box, and our application works really slow....

Thanks in advance,

Josep Maria

--

Josep Maria Pinyol i Fontseca
Responsable àrea de programació

ENDEPRO - Enginyeria de programari
Passeig Anselm Clavé, 19 Bx. 08263 Callús (Barcelona)
Tel. +34 936930018 - Mob. +34 600310755 - Fax. +34 938361994
jmpinyol@endepro.com - http://www.endepro.com


Aquest missatge i els documents en el seu cas adjunts,
es dirigeixen exclusivament al seu destinatari i poden contenir
informació reservada i/o CONFIDENCIAL, us del qual no està
autoritzat ni la divulgació del mateix, prohibit per la legislació
vigent (Llei 32/2002 SSI-CE). Si ha rebut aquest missatge per error,
li demanem que ens ho comuniqui immediatament per la mateixa via o
bé per telèfon (+34936930018) i procedeixi a la seva destrucció.
Aquest e-mail no podrà considerar-se SPAM.

Este mensaje, y los documentos en su caso anexos,
se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario y pueden contener
información reservada y/o CONFIDENCIAL cuyo uso no
autorizado o divulgación está prohibida por la legislación
vigente (Ley 32/2002 SSI-CE). Si ha recibido este mensaje por error,
le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía o
por teléfono (+34936930018) y proceda a su destrucción.
Este e-mail no podrá considerarse SPAM.

This message and the enclosed documents are directed exclusively
to its receiver and can contain reserved and/or confidential
information, from which use isn’t allowed its divulgation, forbidden
by the current legislation (Law 32/2002 SSI-CE). If you have received
this message by mistake, we kindly ask you to communicate it to us
right away by the same way or by phone (+34936930018) and destruct it.
This e-mail can’t be considered as SPAM.

Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca wrote:
>
> Linux box with psql version 7.2.1 versus Windows XP server:
>
> select * from <table>; -> 7 seconds aprox. to obtain a results.
> Network utilization: 100%
>
> Windows XP client box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server:
>
> select * from <table>; -> 60 seconds aprox. to obtain a results!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Network utilization: 3%
>
> Windows XP server box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server:
>
> select * from <table>; -> <1 seconds aprox. to obtain a results.
> Network utilization: 0%

It's *got* to be the network configuration on the client machine. I'd be
tempted to install ethereal on the linux box and watch for the
difference between the two networked sessions.

I'm guessing it might be something to do with TCP/IP window/buffer sizes
and delays on ACKs - this certainly used to be an issue on older MS
systems, but I must admit I thought they'd fixed it for XP.

If not that, could some firewall/security system be slowing network traffic?

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> writes:

> Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca wrote:

> > Windows XP client box with psql version 8.1.1 versus Windows XP server:
> > select * from <table>; -> 60 seconds aprox. to obtain a results!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > Network utilization: 3%

The 60 seconds sounds suspiciously like a DNS problem.

--
greg

Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> writes:
> Josep Maria Pinyol Fontseca wrote:
>> Network utilization: 0%

> It's *got* to be the network configuration on the client machine.

We've seen gripes of this sort before --- check the list archives for
possible fixes.  I seem to recall something about a "QoS patch", as
well as suggestions to get rid of third-party packages that might be
interfering with the TCP stack.

            regards, tom lane

> > It's *got* to be the network configuration on the client machine.
>
> We've seen gripes of this sort before --- check the list archives for
> possible fixes.  I seem to recall something about a "QoS patch", as
> well as suggestions to get rid of third-party packages that might be
> interfering with the TCP stack.

I personally checked out the last report from a poster who got the issue
on win2k but not on winxp.  I ran his exact dump into my 2k server with
no problems.  This is definitely some type of local issue.

Josep: does your table have any large ( > 1k ) fields in it?

Merlin