Hi,

>yes, but by 200+ concurrent connection what do you mean ?

200+ users concurrently using the client/server applications that connect to
this database

> what size of the database ?

Small, about 5Gb. Since it's growing and I don't have access to it I don't
know the exact size.

> what kind of SQL query ?

This database is used by a set of client/server applications -- kind a ERP
and CRM for car/motocicle stores -- it keeps centralized data from 5
diferent stores which do budget, pre-orders, sales, stock, parts, services,
accounting, reports, and so fourth.

> me i speaking about a web App, where mostly all the SQL are
>similar so this why the cache MUST be shared (if not it's a waste of
>resource)

True. OTOH I doubt a shared cache would do any good to a system like the one
I'm describing. Users are most of the time doing different tasks.

> now it's not because it's work that it's work efficiently :)

True. But, if it wasn't working efficiently (from the point of view of
[responsiveness to] users/managers) this ERP/CRM or Firebird would have been
already droped.

=)


regards,
Anderson Farias