| Subject | Re: [firebird-support] How lightweight are superserver and classic? |
|---|---|
| Author | Helen Borrie |
| Post date | 2008-10-09T02:34:12Z |
At 11:06 9/10/2008, you wrote:
Maybe the first thing to get clear in your head is that Firebird is not a database. It is database SERVER software for client/server usage. Client/server means network clients (applications) making requests through an API for services that operate on databases. Architecturally there are numerous ways to effect that. At the small, tight, desktop end that could be running a stand-alone application on a laptop with an embedded server. At the opposite end it could be Web browser clients in a widely distributed network in a multi-tier arrangement; and statistically, it would be just about anything in between.
So - "typical" gets down to asking about resource usage from people who have deployed systems that are architecturally and functionally similar to what you want to do...
./heLen
>Hi all,Database? or database server? The Firebird executable is ~ 2 Mb. DataBASES can be terabytes in size.
>
>I'm looking to evaluate firebird. I am requiring a really lightweight
>database (running hopefully under 200MB, not including the cache in
>main memory).
>I noticed that superserver can take advantage of my dualcore whereasYou have that back to front. SS must NOT be allowed to affine to more than one CPU. Classic - which runs as a separate process per client connected - can affine to any available CPU. I'm afraid I don't know what score is with dual-core CPUs in either case.
>class cannot.
>From the term "superserver" I assume that it is not aSS is one MODEL of the server, while Classic is another. The "super" part of the name means something similar to "supervisor", not something similar to "Superman". :-) It runs a single process and creates threads of itself as required for client connections (as well as for background housecleaning operations).
>lightweight database.
>Can you guys confirm/deny this?Some of the guys could, most of the girls could. ;-) Mind you, given the average age of the girls around here is ~99, we're old enough to know better than to "confirm or deny"....
>What are some typical memory...or to make assessments of capacity based on no information about intended usage in deployment, either.
>footprints of each one (an actual number and units would be helpful).
Maybe the first thing to get clear in your head is that Firebird is not a database. It is database SERVER software for client/server usage. Client/server means network clients (applications) making requests through an API for services that operate on databases. Architecturally there are numerous ways to effect that. At the small, tight, desktop end that could be running a stand-alone application on a laptop with an embedded server. At the opposite end it could be Web browser clients in a widely distributed network in a multi-tier arrangement; and statistically, it would be just about anything in between.
So - "typical" gets down to asking about resource usage from people who have deployed systems that are architecturally and functionally similar to what you want to do...
./heLen