Subject | Re: [IB-Architect] Re : License Question |
---|---|
Author | Emil Briggs |
Post date | 2000-03-24T22:38:13Z |
Jim Starkey wrote:
when I make multiple connections to a Linux box running classic
I see one instance of the lock manager and multiple instances of
gds_inet_server. (One for each connection). So I am assuming that
each instance of gds_inet_server communicates with the lock manager
via Sys 5 IPC (Assumption based on the output of strace
on gds_lock_mgr which shows a bunch of IPC calls).
My interest comes from wanting to implement a read mostly database
that would be scalable by adding nodes to a cluster. Writes (and
the need to do any locking) would be infrequent.
Emil
>Thanks for the info -- not sure I understand you completely here but
>
>
> An Interbase server is a process that listens to the network
> and talks to a local Interbase. Interbase doesn't know that
> it's a server. Depending on start up switches an Interbase
> server serves a single client (started on demand by inetd)
> or an be long lived, serving multiple clients. The latter
> architecture works better on multi-threaded platforms where
> the server can thread switch to avoid monopolization by a
> single client.
>
when I make multiple connections to a Linux box running classic
I see one instance of the lock manager and multiple instances of
gds_inet_server. (One for each connection). So I am assuming that
each instance of gds_inet_server communicates with the lock manager
via Sys 5 IPC (Assumption based on the output of strace
on gds_lock_mgr which shows a bunch of IPC calls).
My interest comes from wanting to implement a read mostly database
that would be scalable by adding nodes to a cluster. Writes (and
the need to do any locking) would be infrequent.
Emil