Well I don't think I'd try to (no.. would never) make 1000 direct
connections to any database. The server has too many important things to do
without overloading the task of maintaining connections.
That said, maybe Oracle can do that no sweat.

IB and I assume FB has always had a recommendation of no more than 100
simultaneous connections but that doesn't mean users. With connection
pooling which would be a basic requirement when you are going over perhaps
50 users, you can increase the simultaneous user count considerably. The
exact count would depend on connection redundancy and user/application
behaviour.

As for size, there is no real limit apart from OS limitations and even then,
you can split the file many times over.
I have no experience with terabyte databases of any persuasion, but I do
know that the speed of IB/FB databases do not noticeably change from a db of
200Kb to 2Gb. But that still depends heavily on the application, the select
demand you place on the DB etc. etc.

There's one comment - perhaps others have disagreement/more to add.
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Stanley [mailto:charles@...]
Sent: Wednesday, 25 September 2002 9:12
To: ib-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [ib-support] Upscale the DBMS?


Is there any comment on this?

At 10:22 AM 09/24/02 -0700, you wrote:

>I'm just concerned about scaling up to
>1000 or so concurrent users and terrabytes of data. I'm sure there is a
>valid reason that people use Oracle, but I'm not sure where the "cut off"
>point may be.
>

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]