# Bad performance of DBAmp V22 **URL:** \ **Category:** CData DBAmp\ **Tags:** question, dbamp\ **Created:** [November 7, 2023, 2:31pm UTC](https://community.cdata.com/t/bad-performance-of-dbamp-v22/511 "2023-11-07T14:31:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DLI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de0a6/32.png) [@DLI](https://community.cdata.com/u/DLI)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2023, 2:31pm UTC](https://community.cdata.com/t/bad-performance-of-dbamp-v22/511/1 "2023-11-07T14:31:02Z")
Why DBAmp V22 SF\_MirrorAll takes much more time (couple hours) than V5.1.9 SF\_RefreshAll? even I skipped many tables, like %History, %Share… Also there are many error messages: Error occurred creating primary key for table. ---
**Author:** ![Dani\_Moran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2acd7d/32.png) [@Dani\_Moran](https://community.cdata.com/u/Dani_Moran)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2023, 6:55pm UTC](https://community.cdata.com/t/bad-performance-of-dbamp-v22/511/2 "2023-11-07T18:55:45Z")
That is not always a fair comparison - SF\_MirrorAll can behave quite differently than SF\_RefreshAll even in the same version, since SF\_Mirror sometimes runs full copies instead of the delta copies that SF\_Refresh always does. Is the timing difference on some runs, or all of them? The full copies should only be once every 7 days. I would suggest sending an email to [DBAmpSupport@CData.com](mailto:DBAmpSupport@CData.com) and including the complete message output of your longer running SF\_MirrorAll. There are a number of small details that can be tweaked with it, perhaps some more performant options that SF\_Mirror has that SF\_Refresh doesn’t, that can be far more easily addressed by going over the output. If there is some consistent performance issue there also, the support team can open a ticket to work on getting that resolved as well! As for the error you mentioned, that particular error message is mostly a warning, also related to the difference in the stored procedure that you are using. If you had run SF\_MirrorAll in v5.1.9, you likely would have gotten the same warning! That can be caused by permissions issues, or be the result of having another table by the same name in a different schema. ---
**Author:** ![DLI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de0a6/32.png) [@DLI](https://community.cdata.com/u/DLI)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2023, 2:22pm UTC](https://community.cdata.com/t/bad-performance-of-dbamp-v22/511/3 "2023-11-08T14:22:03Z")
Thanks Dani for the detailed answer, I will send an email to [DBAmpSupport@CData.com](mailto:DBAmpSupport@CData.com) with the log. Can v22 and v5.1.9 run parallel on the same server? of course with different databases which point to different linked servers. Because so many changes on the new version, we have to test everything, mean while the project team have to use the old version. ---
**Author:** ![Dani\_Moran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2acd7d/32.png) [@Dani\_Moran](https://community.cdata.com/u/Dani_Moran)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2023, 2:28pm UTC](https://community.cdata.com/t/bad-performance-of-dbamp-v22/511/4 "2023-11-08T14:28:07Z")
They can run in parallel! They will need, as you say, different databases and different linked servers, but they can be installed side-by-side, precisely for those testing purposes.