>
> But, obviously, it's makes enough sense to have a guaranteed separated
> device I/O if it affects not only parallel updates but the overall
> performance. I'm talking about undo/redo logs which are written
> independently from data pages. But this is a bit different story.
>
>
> Dmitry

Helen referred me to this thread from the Firebird support list, in
response to my question about whether Firebird supported this feature.

This is indeed the practice in performance tuning other DBMS's (DB2
and Oracle specifically). One physical device for one type of I/O
that is anticipated to be in parallel. There is no advantage to
splitting one table across multiple devices. However, there is an
advantage to separating table from index, and both of these from logs.
On heavily used tables, there is sometimes an advantage to putting a
single table on its own DASD. The advantage is from reduced head
movement, not reduced page locking. The performance advantage is most
noticable when you are performing high volume concurrent transactions
against multiple tables - in the neighborhood of 3M inserts per hour.

I don't currently have a need for this on a Firebird database, but it
is interesting to note that some other people have already been
exploring the possibility of this.