Luiz Gustavo,

> Leyne, Sean escreveu:
> >
> >
> > > I bought an Intel (R) Core (TM) 2 Quad CPU Q6600 2.4 Ghz GNU /
> Linux
> > > and
> > > 4 GB Ram and HD Sata
> > > and i´d like to focus on performance on it!
> > > I have 4 databases
> > > one with a 60% utilization
> > > the others 3 = 10% of usage each
> > >
> > > I would create two instances of Firebird, one for 60% (3050 port)
> and
> > > another
> >
>
> > > How many clients will be connecting to the databases,
> simultaneously?
> >
> 30 clients
> >Will those clients be performing simple/short operations or
> performing long/extended analysis queries?
> simple/short, many triggers and stored procedures

Frequent or infrequent activity?

> >
> >
> > >Depending on the above, it may be more appropriate and certainly
> > easier to simply install the Classic engine.
> >
>
> > dont u recommend 2 instances with SS ? why ?

1 - I don't know Linux all that well, so I couldn't offer any help installing 2 SS instances. In many respects, CS provides many of the same benefits as SS (especially on Linux), without the need for the 'complicated' install.

2 - All of our Firebird deployments are on Windows, so given that SS still doesn't scale well across CPUs. CS is better/more consistent for our purposes.

3 - Our application hasn't used SS for 7+ years, we have too many database connections (100 to 200) performing a both short/fast operations and number of long running/database intensive operations. So, we know what the user experience/database performance will be like.

There has been a lot of work in v2.x on the engine scheduler, which we haven't tested, for our purposes CS provides a more consistent/predicable experience. When you have 50+ clients with 120 separate Firebird installs, a consistent treatment/install on the servers for support purposes is a significant benefit.


Sean