At 01:19 AM 13/05/2004 +0000, you wrote:

>--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Martijn Tonies"
><m.tonies@u...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > > Can other applications access to a Firebird-emmbedded application?
> > >
> > > My application wants Firebird server be embedded so as to achieve
>the
> > > top performance in the meanwhile other third party applications
>can
> > > access to the server's data via ODBC!
> >
> > Why would using embedded achive top performance? Because
> > it doesn't use the network protocol? If so, then I've got some bad
> > news for you --
> >
>
>I thought there were 3 ways to use Firebird server:
>a) as remote server
>b) as a local server (not to set the network protocol).
>c) embedded Firebird.

You missed one - the one you actually need. That is a local application
running on the server using a local loopback connection.

>A local server should gain some performance over a remote one since
>no network packet is physically transmitted.

It really depends on what you are doing. If you have an app that is
passing huge packets of data, there will be a theoretical gain using local
loopback. If most of your overhead is inside the server itself, then there
won't be all that much of a gain over working from a remote workstation.

Don't forget that an application running locally on the server will eat
resources that the server would otherwise have available to it. So - if
it's Windows you're talking about here, or Linux running a local app using
X, then the supposed gain from running locally is likely to overwhelmed by
the hunger of the local application.

Forget embedded server for a multi-user scenario (unless you are using it
for a server-based application server tier). If you have remote users who
need to connect to the same database, the embedded model is not what you
need. The answer to your "subject" is a resounding NO.

/heLen