| Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Re: TempCacheLimit in Super Classic |
|---|---|
| Author | Alexey Kovyazin |
| Post date | 2014-07-08T11:07:45Z |
Hi,
Ï am not sure that Dmitry wins here, since original question is not 100% correct.
Cache is always per server process - each server process has own cache, in all architectures, and difference is in connection/server process model.
So, SuperClassic is like Classic in terms of usage - the more clients connected the more memory will be consumed.
SuperServer has single cache (per database), it will be shared between connected users.
Regards,
Alexey Kovyazin
IBSurgeon
Ï am not sure that Dmitry wins here, since original question is not 100% correct.
Cache is always per server process - each server process has own cache, in all architectures, and difference is in connection/server process model.
So, SuperClassic is like Classic in terms of usage - the more clients connected the more memory will be consumed.
SuperServer has single cache (per database), it will be shared between connected users.
Regards,
Alexey Kovyazin
IBSurgeon
Thank you very much. 2 vs 1, but in this case I asume that Dmitry wins.
I'll check the optimized configuration files.
Jaume
2014-07-07 20:41 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Yemanov dimitr@... [firebird-support] <firebird-support@yahoogroups.com>:
07.07.2014 21:14, Thomas Steinmaurer wrote:Nope, it's per server process.
>> I would like to know if the TempCacheLimit parameter in SuperClassic is
>> like Classic or like SuperServer? So if it's per client connection or
>> it's for server process?
>
> As in Classic, thus per connection.
Dmitry