Re: [firebird-support] FB suitability for Consolidated Database of 15 GB.
Hello Alexey, >> But for centralized >> database they have doubt that whether it will sustain the volume of 10 >> to 15 GB > > : > > One of our customers' databases (not the biggest :) - excerpt from daily > report from DataGuard, pay attention to database size > > ==cit= > > Regular backup was done successfully > > Backup [D:\_backup\bckp_vlm_wtl_20111007_22-00.fbk] 98 Gb was created at > 10:00:00 PM took 01h:45m:51s.534 to complete. > > Backup: > [OK] Backup [D:\_backup\bckp_vlm_wtl_20111007_22-00.fbk] 98 Gb done > successfully at 11:45:51 PM, taking 01h:45m:51s.534. > > Restore: > [OK] Restore [D:\_backup\restore.fdb.tmp] 105 Gb done successfully > at 1:22:48 AM, taking 01h:36m:56s.710. > > ==cit= > > 1Terabyte database - http://www.ib-aid.com/articles/item104 > > And also there is 700Gb beast in production - case study is coming soon :) Especially the chosen backup/restore strategy at this size. ;-) -- With regards, Thomas Steinmaurer * Firebird Foundation Committee Member http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/firebird-foundation/ * Upscene Productions - Database Tools for Developers http://www.upscene.com/ * My Blog http://blog.upscene.com/thomas/index.php
Re: [firebird-support] FB suitability for Consolidated Database of 15 GB.
Hello, raja_s_patil! Saturday, October 8, 2011, 9:37:06 AM, you wrote: r> client wants to stick to FB at Branches for sure. But for centralized r> database they have doubt that whether it will sustain the volume of 10 r> to 15 GB and how it will perform and have given indication that they 10-15 GB databases now are the most average database size for Firebird. r> 1. Whether FB 2.1 SS / FB 2.5 ?? on 64 bit Linux (Kubuntu) will be r> able to handle 15GB database ? it will be able to handle even 1TB database with ~500 concurrent users. r> 2. What version should be selected FB 2.1, 2.5 and which architecture? Of course, the newer is better, so, 2.5.1. Architecture - Classic or SuperClassic, because only these architectures supports SMP. SuperServer does not support SMP, but can be used for ~20 or more users, if applications are not mix with OLTP and DSS queries. r> 3. What precautions should we take like Processor, RAM, Linux FS r> selection etc. etc. so that FB will run with maximum efficiency and r> stability. efficiency and stability depends on hardware. Pay attention to disks, use raid 10. At most systems hardware is very different, because of differen Firebird load, so, it's a bit hard to give exact suggestions. Since you already have Firebird with 1.5gb databases and ~10-15 users, I don't think that you need to look at hardware that, for example, 10 times faster than current. 15 users or 40 users - not a big difference, until you use 1-2 core processor and 1 hard disk (which is usually considered as a "desktop computer"). BTW, 1TB test, that Alexey mentioned, was intentionally made on desktop computer, not server. -- Dmitry Kuzmenko, www.ib-aid.com
Re: [firebird-support] FB suitability for Consolidated Database of 15 GB.
08.10.2011 9:37, raja_s_patil: > But for centralized > database they have doubt that whether it will sustain the volume of 10 > to 15 GB : One of our customers' databases (not the biggest :) - excerpt from daily report from DataGuard, pay attention to database size ==cit= Regular backup was done successfully Backup [D:\_backup\bckp_vlm_wtl_20111007_22-00.fbk] 98 Gb was created at 10:00:00 PM took 01h:45m:51s.534 to complete. Backup: [OK] Backup [D:\_backup\bckp_vlm_wtl_20111007_22-00.fbk] 98 Gb done successfully at 11:45:51 PM, taking 01h:45m:51s.534. Restore: [OK] Restore [D:\_backup\restore.fdb.tmp] 105 Gb done successfully at 1:22:48 AM, taking 01h:36m:56s.710. ==cit= 1Terabyte database - http://www.ib-aid.com/articles/item104 And also there is 700Gb beast in production - case study is coming soon :) Regards, Alexey Kovyazin IBSurgeon (www.ib-aid.com)
[firebird-support] FB suitability for Consolidated Database of 15 GB.
Hello Friends, We have been using Firebird since v. 1.5 on Linux as well on windows for Delphi application running on Win and server on Lin/Win as per needs in Lan environment. Now Client wants to have centralized database with two way Replication at HO. The branch database size varies from 200MB to 1.2GB and estimated combined database will be about 10GB to 15GB. On centralized database except replication connections (which will be Batch running as per Branch convenience and not real time) there will be 10 to 15 users always connected plus a small web application may have 30 to 40 simultaneous users as a primary estimate and may be on higher side. As far as Branches are concerned we are very happy with performance and Stability of database not a single instance of any data corruptions have been noticed in last 7 to 8 years inspite of very rough usage by Branch users so client wants to stick to FB at Branches for sure. But for centralized database they have doubt that whether it will sustain the volume of 10 to 15 GB and how it will perform and have given indication that they can Try first FB and if it fails they can go for some other Commercial Database. As far as we are concerned we would like to stick to FB but our confidence level is low since we dont have any experience of FB stability and performance on such large database. To make FB successful in this scenario please guide w.r.t. Following queries. 1. Whether FB 2.1 SS / FB 2.5 ?? on 64 bit Linux (Kubuntu) will be able to handle 15GB database ? 2. What version should be selected FB 2.1, 2.5 and which architecture? 3. What precautions should we take like Processor, RAM, Linux FS selection etc. etc. so that FB will run with maximum efficiency and stability. Thanks and warm regards. R. S. Patil.
