--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Adam" <s3057043@...> wrote:

>
> --- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "diegodelafuente"
> <diegodelafuente@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have a Red Hat v9 2.4kernel with Fb 1.5 Superserver. I´am

using ext

> > 3 for the Partition Type.
> > 100 users use thist Server to access a single Database.
> > The Server Hardware is an IBM Server Series 206, with 3GB Ram

and 2

> > disks in Raid 1.
> > Is this OS the best choice for my equipment ?
>
> Do you honestly expect an answer to that?
>
> > Does Fb runs better with a Server 2003 and NTFS ?
>
> No better, I doubt any worse either. Both have benefits and issues.
>
> > Does Fb Clasic Server run s better for 100 users with 3Gb of

Ram ?

>
> Classic server runs better where multiple CPUs are involved,
> Superserver runs better where the different connections run similar
> queries and can share the cache. I would think that (unless you

have

> bumped up the cache size significantly) 100 users would take under

a Gig.

>
> >
> > Another Question.
> > How can I check if The Raid Card is apropiate for my workload ?
> > Can I see some statictis or something else ? I have not

experience

> > with Linux.
>
> To be honest, you are dealing with a database server for 100 users.
> You mention 2 disks? What are they? (Better be SCSI). You may want

to

> consider a separate disk for the tmp space.
>
> Adam
>

Adam:
I´am using SuperServer for an app that runs a lot of diferents
queries. some of them are complex queries. I have 3GB of Ram.
So I will change to classic Server to support simultaneous queries.
I think that 3GB of Ram I will not have problems.
I have SCSI 320 disk with Raid 1. Yo use one disk for tmp files I
need to brake the RAID. I don´t wan´t to do it.
the Procesor Supports HyperTrading, but I disabled it to use
SuperServer version of FB.
Is better to enable it with classic Server ?

Diego