|
Home > Archive > SQL Anywhere for Linux > January 2006 > 1 engine or 2 engine?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
1 engine or 2 engine?
|
|
|
| Hi
What is the best way: run one engine over two databases
or
two engines for each database?
| |
| Chris Keating(iAnywhere Solutions) 2005-12-29, 8:23 pm |
| Generally, one engine.
--
Chris Keating
Sybase Adaptive Server Anywhere Professional Version 8
********************
********************
********************
*****************
Sign up today for your copy of the SQL Anywhere Studio 9 Developer
Edition =and try out the market-leading database for mobile, embedded
and small to medium sized business environments for free!
http://www.ianywhere.com/promos/deved/index.html
********************
********************
********************
*****************
iAnywhere Solutions http://www.iAnywhere.com
** Please only post to the newsgroup
** Whitepapers can be found at http://www.iAnywhere.com/developer
** EBFs can be found at http://downloads.sybase.com/swx/sdmain.stm
** Use Case Express to report bugs http://case-express.sybase.com
********************
********************
********************
*****************
| |
| Mohammed Abouzour 2006-01-03, 1:23 pm |
| If you have a machine with more than 2GB of RAM and your workload can
easily consume 2GB of database cache then it is better to use one engine
per database.
Keep in mind that 32-bit processes can at most use 2GB of address space,
therefore two processes would be able to utilize more of your available RAM.
--
Mohammed
Alex wrote:
> Hi
>
> What is the best way: run one engine over two databases
> or
> two engines for each database?
| |
|
| Could you give more explanation.
If only one engine is used has both databases a shared
cache?
> If you have a machine with more than 2GB of RAM and your
> workload can easily consume 2GB of database cache then it
> is better to use one engine per database.
>
> Keep in mind that 32-bit processes can at most use 2GB of
> address space, therefore two processes would be able to
> utilize more of your available RAM.
>
You meant 4GB, I guess.
| |
| Greg Fenton 2006-01-22, 8:23 pm |
| Alex wrote:
> Could you give more explanation.
> If only one engine is used has both databases a shared
> cache?
Yes, the database server ("engine") has one set of resources (memory
pool, worker threads, etc...) and those resources are split amongst all
the databases that it has open.
> You meant 4GB, I guess.
Nope, 2GB. In the SQLAnywhere 9.x online docs, see:
ASA Database Administration Guide
Physical Limitations
- Size and number limitations
One server can have at most 2GB of memory in use in a 32-bit
environment. If you think your two databases will need more than that,
then run each database on a separate engine.
Hope this helps,
greg.fenton
--
Greg Fenton
Consultant, Solution Services, iAnywhere Solutions
--------
Visit the iAnywhere Solutions Developer Community
Whitepapers, TechDocs, Downloads
http://www.ianywhere.com/developer/
|
|
|
|
|