chriskudla wrote:

>I know that the update of a large number of records is not ideal.
>Unfortunately we have a user who likes to update once a month and so
>this situation arises.
>

Does the update involve indexed fields? Do those indexes have a
relatively small number of unique values compared with the total number
of rows in the table? If so, get rid of the indexes.

>What I really want to know is if the behaviour of ibserver in terms
>of not releasing memory is 'normal' and whether anything can be done
>to release the memory back to the OS, other than stopping and
>restarting the service. Is this perhaps a Windows issue and might be
>solved by moving the database onto a Linux server?
>

Yes, not releasing memory is normal behavior. Allocating memory is
relatively expensive and in normal circumstances the memory that's freed
up at the end of one operation is used for another. How much memory is
the server holding down? Is the system page faulting?

Regards,


Ann