Hi Thomas

Have you tried examining the firebird.conf settings? You can do a lot
of database tuning in there.

You can for instance set the DefaultDbCachePages to a larger number
than the default depending on the amount of memory on your server.

I have seen some documents on this at the Firebird website, but I do
not remember where.

Ove

--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Løcke <thomas@...> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> In my business I have a mission critical application. This application
> is more or less the core of my product. It was custom build for my
> company a good 6-7 years ago. It utilizes 3 databases: 1 Firebird and 2
> Microsoft Access. All three databases are located on the same server as
> the application itself. The application is Windows only, so naturally
> the server is installed with Windows.
>
> The connection to the Firebird database is done "natively" in the
> application, which is programmed in Delphi. The 2 Microsoft Access
> databases are accessed using ODBC. One of the Microsoft Access
databases
> are also being accessed by a webserver (also via ODBC). This webserver
> is also installed on the server.
>
> Lately my business have seen a surge in new customers, and performance
> is starting to be an issue. The server is already running the "fastest"
> single core CPU money can buy, as going multicore is not an option. The
> application craps out in the presence of more cores. Redoing the
> application to run on a multicore system is too expensive, so that's
not
> an option. The performance issues are database related, as the
> application itself doesn't use a lot of resources.
>
> The amount of data being moved to and from the databases are miniscule,
> but the queries can be quite taxing.
>
> I've thought about moving the three databases to a new multicore Linux
> server with Firebird installed. I would then convert the two Microsoft
> Access databases to Firebird and still access them using ODBC.
>
> My questions are:
>
> Is the Firebird ODBC driver stable? I've noticed the latest versions
are
> considered BETA, and the non-BETA versions are quite old. Which one
> should I opt for?
>
> Is Firebird suitable for web access? I will be accessing the database
> from a PHP powered web application situated on a dedicated web server
> (Apache). The current solution where I access the Microsoft Access
> database using ODBC is by no means fast, so I'm not spoiled.
>
> Classic or Super? I've read the papers on the subject, and it seems to
> me that I should go for Classic, seeing as I would like to fully
utilize
> a multicore system. Is this assumption correct?
>
> How important is RAM? The databases aren't very large (a few hundred
> megs total). On the Windows server it seems the Firebird instance never
> grows beyond 25-30 MB. I know from a few MySQL servers I run that
RAM is
> God. The more the better. It seems this might not be the case for
Firebird?
>
> How important is harddrive speed? IDE, SATA, SCSI?
>
> Intel or AMD? I personally have no preference, except I tend to cheer
> for the little guy. :o)
>
> OS suggestions? I plan on using Slackware, as all my other servers are
> running Slack (except of course for the one Windows server discussed
above).
>
> This is my very first venture into the Firebird world. Any and all
> advice is welcome.
>
> --
> Med Venlig Hilsen
> Thomas Løcke
>
> Loecke K/S
> Mosekrogen 3
> DK-3520 Farum
>
> Tel : +45 70205721
> Fax : +45 44995715
> Mobil: +45 24247138
>
> Mail: thomas@...
> Web : loecke.dk
>