Alexandre Benson Smith wrote:

> Tom Miller wrote:
>
>> Thanks, so each connection is a server and can use up to 2gb.
>>
>
> Yes
>
>
>> and if 200
>> people connected and each was using 128k, then some 20GB of memory would
>> get used? Just to make sure I understand.
>>
>
> 128KB of cache ??? If so assuming you use 8KB pages it would be 16 pages ?
>
> CS uses by default (if not overrided by database or connection settings
> and not changed on firebird.conf) 75 datapages for cache, if you use 8KB
> pages it would be 600KB per connection. There are others structures that
> the server instance would handle and that consumes memory.
>
> By the way 128KB per connection * 200 connections would be 25MB not 20GB
>

I was about to leave for the day. I guess my math gets worse as the day
progresses :-)

>
>> There doesn't seem to be any
>> commented out default configuration params in the firebird.conf file.
>> Is that on purpose as we shouldn't be messing with the parameters or an
>> over site?
>>
>>
>
> In a default Firebird.Conf file you will find something like this:
> # ----------------------------
> # Number of cached database pages
> #
> # This sets the number of pages from any one database that can be held
> # in cache at once. If you increase this value, the engine will
> # allocate more pages to the cache for every database. By default, the
> # SuperServer allocates 2048 pages for each database and the classic
> # allocates 75 pages per client connection per database.
> #
> # Type: integer
> #
> #DefaultDbCachePages = 2048
>
> If you not coment it out and set a different number, CS will use 75
> pages per connection as database cache
>
>

I am using the 2.1 beta and many of the normal configuration points I
see for SS are missing from the file. I will ask over on the Dev group
to see if they missed something by accident. They also haven't update
the distribution file name to 21 (still 20).

>> I think the cached pages for CS defaults to 75 and I was going to bump
>> it to 200 (if that makes sense).
>>
>>
>
> I think you should expriment to see the best that fits your needs, I
> have read reports about letting it at 75 per connection and let the OS
> uses spare memory for file system level cache, that would be shared by
> any CS instance.
>
>
>> In addition, the gbak file I am restoring is from IB 7.51. Is there a
>> FB (1.1 or 1.5) GBAK that is compatible with IB 7.51? If not I can
>> always extract the DDL and datapump the data.
>>
>>
>
> I don't know.
>
> If I were you, I would extract the metadata, create a new database using
> FB and pump the data over. I think it is the safest approach.
>
>

Yes, just time consuming when you have 40 databases to do that to.

>> Thanks
>>
>> Tom Miller
>>
>>
>>
>
> see you !
>
>