Need fast temp-table create/fill - Forum - OpenEdge Development - Progress Community

Need fast temp-table create/fill

This question is not answered

OE10.2B08 HP-UX 64i

I have about 1.7M records to load in a TT.  It takes about 14 minutes to fill the TT with a Fill() or for each with buffer-copy. That's about 2K recs per second.

Reading the 1.7M recs table takes 30 seconds.

I can speed it up by not copying the fields I don't need.  But I'd rather not do this.

This seems "slow" to me, but I could be wrong.  My -T is pointing to a good hard disk, is there anything I should look at to improve the fill performance of a temp-table ?

All Replies
  • Take a look at the -Bt (# TT buffers) and see if bumping that up from default helps.

  • Try to set -tmpbsize to 8 as well.

    Sent from Nine

    Von: Rick Terrell <>
    Gesendet: 12.01.2017 10:51 nachm.
    Betreff: RE: [Technical Users - OE Development] Need fast temp-table create/fill

    Update from Progress Community
    Rick Terrell

    Take a look at the -Bt (# TT buffers) and see if bumping that up from default helps.

    View online


    You received this notification because you subscribed to the forum.  To unsubscribe from only this thread, go here.

    Flag this post as spam/abuse.

    Architect of the SmartComponent Library and WinKit

    Consultingwerk Ltd.

  • tmpbsize is 8 already, but the -Bt is not increased, as this is a one time process (fill once, do work and exit).  I just got a new drive on the server will see if that makes a difference.

  • > fill once, do work and exit

    If you are going to exit the session after doing the work then it isn't going to hold onto temp-table buffer memory indefinitely.  

    Why not increase -Bt so the temp-table can be memory-resident?  It should improve performance significantly if you eliminate the disk I/O, more so than moving disk I/O to a better disk.

  • Or put -T (and the DBI files) on a RAM disk.

  • Walking the whole table after fill takes less than a minute, not a problem really.  Also, I don't care if a percentage of the table is in memory when reads from disk are fast.

  • Time, I have not thought about the RAM disk.  Good idea I'll check with the datacenter if this can be done without too much cost.