--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Kjell Rilbe <kjell.rilbe@...> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> For performance reasons we're considering a setup where our 50+ Gbyte
> Firebird database would reside on a RAM-disk.
>
> I'd like to hear if anyone else has had experience with running large FB
> databases in RAM. Any problems? Performance compared to disk based? Any
> gotchas?
>
> The server has strong UPS at our hosting company, so we will accept
> nightly backups as "good enough". Backup would be done by bringing the
> system offline and copy the fdb file (currently not using nbackup due to
> an unresolved problem that we suspect was caused by nbackup). backup
> will be made both to local disks and to a remote rsync volume.
>
> The server is a Win 2008 web server, 64 bit.
>
> The current setup is with two RAID 1 volumes, one with OS, app etc, and
> the other with the database file and nothing else. Write cache enabled
> on the disks and forced writes off in the DB.
>
> Thanks,
> Kjell
> --
> ------------------------------
> Kjell Rilbe
> DataDIA AB
> E-post: kjell.rilbe@...
> Telefon: 08-761 06 55
> Mobil: 0733-44 24 64
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi,

i have one installation with "the same" database size - 48 GB on RAM-DISC but i do somethink like this.

I put database on RAM-DISC but for may purposes only nightly backup was not acceptable solution - becaouse of that i use shadow file also
on RAID volume :)

Benefits - very very fast read operations and no loos of data.
I make script for activating (shadows) and restoring database in ram-disc if some totally power failture occure - UPS also can fail and do problems

Karol Bieniaszewski