> >If you want reliable 24/7 operation, it can be achieved with
> >Windows but it takes effort. Which is why we are NOW only
> >using Linux on high load applications.
> fwiw, I wasn't advising this character not to use Windows. The
> point I was
> making was that, even with plenty of memory on board and a
> Microsoft-branded Windows application, I'd experienced the BSOD on Win2K
> with SP4 - meaning, I don't share his faith in Windows' ability to manage
> memory.
>
> My point (in response to the question he asked) was that it's
> tempting fate
> to over-configure the DBCache---but more so on Windows, on a box that is
> under-spec'ed for what he's trying to do with it.
>
> However, as promised, I won't respond to any more of his emails, since he
> has such unshakeable faith that memory is NOT the cause. :-)
>
> /heLen

As you indicated - the default dbcache has always provided good performance
for me as an "all-round" setting.
Alan