Subject Re: Firebird/2.5 and Win/2008R2
Author Aage Johansen
Alexandre responded:
My experience is with OLTP use, once you said that there is few
insert/update/delete perhaps the shared cache of SS could be a good
benefit, but I think that the OS cache could do the same job...
A natural choice for SMP machine is CS or SC...
I would choose SC or CS instead of SS even if the most use is select's

Alexey responded:
Use Classic or SuperClassic to benefit from multi-CPU environment (if
one user will run bad query which consumes 100% CPU, others will work
without any problem).
Since RAM is > database size, the database will be stored completely in
file cache (after some time), it means better performance, but stability
becomes an issue - ensure you make reliable backups and, of course, use UPS.

Thank you for comments and advice.

Are there any peculiarities with the setup of SuperClassic? Cache
size for CS is very different than cache size for SS - what are the
rules for SuperClassic?
The main database (in SuperCerver mode) currently uses a page size of
8KB, and 8K page buffers - totalling 64MB. This (64MB) isn't much,
but it is according to the old recommendations of "don't use more
than about 10000 pages". Does a cache size of 1GB (with 64bit
SuperClassic) seem reasonable?

What are experiences with the configuration setting "FileSystemCacheThreshold"?
The ReleaseNotes mentions its relationship to the value of
"MaxFileSystemCache", but it also says that "MaxFileSystemCache" is
no longer a valid parameter (for 2.5)! Maybe this needs to be
cleaned up in the ReleaseNotes?

Aage J.