Thanks for your answer.

you wrote

>you are more likely to double the overheads and defeat the RDBMS >>
>buffer pooling cache (make it use more resources and slow things > >
>down) than improve things with this architecture.

Can't I enable the pooling cache in embedded mode? (Since I have only
one client process which is my server I don't mind to give the needed
cache to the server).

You wrote that the embedded mode is suitable for a web services
application. Can you give some more details on what you ment?
(My application is very similar to a web services server).

Thanks in advance,
Avner

--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, David Johnson <johnson_d@...>
wrote:

>
> Let me rephrase what I think you are saying:
>
> 1. You have an existing application that consists of a client piece and
> a midware server piece.
> 2. The client piece talks to your midware server piece.
> 3. You want to use Firebird embedded as the backing store for the
> midware server part of your application
>
> U have measured less than 5% improvement in throughput on small
> transactions by using embedded over superserver.
>
> Embedded is superserver in a DLL, so it is not surprising that the
> performance of the two models are similar. The sockets overhead is very
> small, so there is not much difference between them in practical usage.
>
> A transaction is not "per client", it is the smallest unit of work per
> connection. When it does I/O, your midware will need to respond to
> requests from the client by starting a transaction, performing the
> queries (select, insert, update, delete), and committing the
> transaction.
>
> It will not require less resources than the superserver because, as
> already stated, the embedded engine is the superserver in a DLL. You
> will simply add the overheads of your process to the superserver
> overheads. Lacking more concrete information, it is my judgement that
> you are more likely to double the overheads and defeat the RDBMS buffer
> pooling cache (make it use more resources and slow things down) than
> improve things with this architecture.
>
> With that said, there are other reasons for considering wrapping the
> RDBMS in a midware server. For example, if you want to embed complex
> business logic on the server that does not properly belong in the RDBMS
> layer, or if you are running a web services type application, or you are
> running a field-level security system, or you need to scale beyond what
> the RDBMS native connection pool will allow (say you need to connect
> 50,000 concurrent users). However, your questions are concerned with
> the resource usage of one of the most resource efficient pieces of the
> equation, so it is not likely that any of these other considerations
> apply.
>
> On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 10:49 +0000, avner_liat wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'm new to this database and trying to decide what will be the best
> > usage of the database in my case.
> > I have an exisiting client server architecture and I want to use the
> > firebird in the server side only.
> > I support in my server multiple clients which can update the database
> > concurrently by sending application specific commands.
> > This is why I want to open concurrent multiple database "transactions"
> > and do for each client its work in a dedicated transaction.
> > Since the only process which access the database is the server I was
> > thinking of using the embedded option.
> > My questions are:
> > 1. Is using the embedded server option will give better performance
> > (because no networking and round loops are involved)?
> > 2. Will hosting the database in my process will require less resources
> > than running the SuperServer?
> > Are there any other issues I should consider?
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Avner
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > Visit http://firebird.sourceforge.net and click the Resources item
> > on the main (top) menu. Try Knowledgebase and FAQ links !
> >
> > Also search the knowledgebases at http://www.ibphoenix.com
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> > Technical support
> > Computer technical
> > support
> > Compaq computer
> > technical support
> > Compaq technical
> > support
> > Hewlett packard
> > technical support
> > Microsoft technical
> > support
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > 1. Visit your group "firebird-support" on the web.
> >
> > 2. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > firebird-support-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > 3. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service.
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> >
>