Subject Re: Importing Records
Author Alexander V.Nevsky
--- In ib-support@y..., "Mike Grover" <mike@l...> wrote:

> What is better on the Firebird page?
> Classic or super server?
> What is the diff?

I'm not Great Inside Firebird Guru, so I can tell my
understanding only. Super is: one process with multy threads to serve
connections. Main advantage is common cashe - no interprocess
communications and if many connections work with the same data all is
"at hands". So Super should be more fast. Classic is: process with own
cashe for each connection. Advantages:
1. If for some reason process die, only it's connection is terminated.
2. If I made inaccurate select that eats all resources, I can kill
process without bothering others.
3. Due to not well thread control within Super, Classic have better
load ability - influence of heavy loaded work in one connection is
much less than in Super. For the same reason only Classic can use
advantages of multy-proceessor machine, on NT/W2K second processor
even decreases performance in some cases.
Disadvantage - you can't use large amount of cashe buffers for
many-users systems - users*<cashe size> should be less free RAM.
There is Super only for NT/W2k.
Personally I use FB Classic 0.9.4p1 on Linux on similar with your
machine for ~ 40 users with 2048 cashe buffers of 8192 bytes for each,
and I'm happy with my MRP system with it's heavy regular work (low
amount of employes causes sophisticated SP and trigger chains) and
statistic analysis. I know at least one company with 200 users on the
same build and database ~ 2 Gb, don't know about complexity of data
structures, it's system for sale aircraft tickets.
I haven't time to test all new builds, part of our system is in
develop yet, so I can't speak about more fresh builds. My friends try
snapshot builds for learning purposes, just now they don't report
serious problems, many of them use 0.9.5 in real life.
You can visit and know more than I can say, from
here going to "sourceforge area" you can look through list of known

Best regards.