Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Re: Superserver vs Classic Server |
---|---|
Author | Daniel Rail |
Post date | 2003-10-27T14:41:24Z |
Hi,
At October 27, 2003, 05:33, GOVINDKRISHNA wrote:
manages its threads better than Windows(that's what I've been told).
It in the development plan for FB 2.0(development only started, and
not yet in Alpha stage)
scheduler(but still not ready for SMP under Windows), so these slow
downs are practically a thing of the past. I have some clients that
are running FB 1.5 and haven't noticed a slow down when running a
complex report, compared to FB 1.0. Although, having FB 1.5 faster
than FB 1.0 does help.
--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior System Engineer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)
At October 27, 2003, 05:33, GOVINDKRISHNA wrote:
> Superserver pros - less resourcesApparently, it doesn't seem to be a problem on Linux, since Linux
> Superserver cons - cannot take advantage of multiple processors.
manages its threads better than Windows(that's what I've been told).
It in the development plan for FB 2.0(development only started, and
not yet in Alpha stage)
> If one connection is doing very intensive queries will impact otherFB 1.5 has some configuration parameters to tweak the thread
> connections. for e.g. when a backup is running all the other clients
> "feel it".
scheduler(but still not ready for SMP under Windows), so these slow
downs are practically a thing of the past. I have some clients that
are running FB 1.5 and haven't noticed a slow down when running a
complex report, compared to FB 1.0. Although, having FB 1.5 faster
than FB 1.0 does help.
--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior System Engineer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)