"Wayne Blair" <wayne.blair / relian.com> wrote in message
news:rmcR6.37557$v5.3217953 / news1.rdc1.ct.home.com...
> "Daniel Berger" <djberg96 / hotmail.com> wrote
> >It doesn't appear to actually run any faster using threads or
> > just sending the queries sequentially.  Am I doing this right?
>
> It looks like you are using the same connection (dbh) in each thread.
This
> resource may
> not be able to handle the requests concurrently.  Perhaps you should
create
> a pool of
> connections and try it that way,  only starting threads when a connection
> becomes available.
> You could try a pool of 20 connections, for example, that would allow up
to
> 20 threads to be
> processing at a time.  Make sure this is the problem before you get too
into
> it, though.
>
> Wayne

A good suggestion that, unfortunately, didn't yield any better results.  I
created a pool of 4 connections, then threaded each sql statement with an
already established connection (which was then closed once used).

No matter what I try, I'm getting around 8 seconds each time.  It could very
well be that I'm querying faster, and that the bottleneck lay in either file
IO, establishing connections, some obscure Bughat 6.2 limitation or
something else I haven't thought of.

Thanks for the idea.  Maybe I'll hit on something else yet, or someone will
run with it and come up with something.

Regards,

Dan