> > We pool connections for about 200 users, so there's only
> > about 10-15 active fb_inet_servers going at any one time -
> > not a large system by any means. 4-6pm in the evening gets
> > busy, with the load average reaching 6's though!
>
> Hmmm... 200 connections would do it for me but 10-15 is nowhere
> near enough. Connection pooling does not fit the security model
> I have adopted, indeed one of my applications maintains two
> connections per user - so I think I am stuck with Superserver.

Not by any means. Classic will handle that standing in it's head.
If you're concerned about Classic running away with all you RAM, tune down
some of it's memory limits:

SortMemUpperLimit (Page 748 of Helens book):
"...Default (8MB) is too large unless only a handful of clients are
connected..."
DatabaseCachePages (HB: Page 747-748):
"...no formula that can be applied to set an optimal default cache
size..."

In short, if you've got a serious job to do, and you've got multiple CPU's
(logical or physical), I'd say Classic will serve you better.

Until the advanced threading systems from Vulcan are adopted, or
SuperServer's lock management/serialized core components are enhanced, I'd
only use SS on a single processor...

>
> Actually it all works very well with the only exception being
> when we hit this pausing bug on specific hardware.

And the bug won't happen in Classic...as Helen said in another reply, it
won't take you long to uninstall SS, install Classic, and give it a go.

>
> > Forgive me if components of this reply are incorrect - I'm
> > still learning...
>
> Me too!
>

It's heaps good fun though, eh!

Nige.