|Re: [IB-Architect] Pros and cons...
> I certainly think that if you could combine the 'best' bits of bothI think (others may confirm or deny) that this is what
> architectures into one version, that would be the way to go.
we are trying to answer. Can we accomplish this or does
the Classic need to continue on.
> In development it is a must.I agree.
> In production, it is very useful not only for those badIf using TCP, this is already implemented (as of v5.6 maybe
> queries you have missed :-), but for 'users' who disconnect
> badly (using the on/off switch).
v5.5 -- I forget -- Charlie??) in SuperServer. The Crystal
reports / adhoc query issue is a killer. I think that improving
our join performance could likely lessen the impact of many
of those CR generated queries.
> You could implement some extra triggers for 'users', AfterLogin,I'm not sure that these would solve this problem but they are
> BeforeLogout, AfterCrash, AfterTimeOut.
interesting to think about. Many things could be handled
already with the Events in IBX/IBO. The TIBDatabase has
IdleTimer -- Monitors a time interval for a connection doing
Before/After | Connect/Disconnect
> I did not think Superserver scaled at all on SMP machines, II suspect that if a performance hit is seen, its likely
> thought it took a performance hit?
due to the OS' processor scheduling mechanisms. I've only
heard troubles with NT and SMP with IB SS, thus IB_Affinity