Re[9]: [Firebird-devel] Max transaction duration

[Nickolay S. <sk...@bs...>]

Hello Ann,

Sunday, December 15, 2002, 9:34:25 PM, you wrote:

> At 02:24 PM 12/15/2002 +0300, Nickolay Samofatov wrote:

>>Oracle internals and operation seems very, very close to Firebird
>>internals. Saying more, Firebird CS have better potential to scale
>>then Oracle now. Firebird CS codebase is already cluster-ready and it
>>should work exteremely nice in cluster because of very clever VIO code.
>>I'm curious when first clustered solution will be implemented with
>>Firebird...

> You missed it by about 20 years.  The architecture was designed for
> VAX clusters and ran there very nicely.  The difference between VAX
> clusters and current cluster implementations is that VAXen had a
> distributed lock manager.  With that piece, we'd run on clusters
> perfectly.

This is exactly the piece I'm going to create/adapt just after
adoption of new memory manager and class library.
Ann, what about contracts with hardware manufacturers ?
Firebird Clustered Appliance. Sounds good, yeah ?

Serveral Intel SMP Linux machines wired using gigabit ethernet,
Myrinet or fibre channel network + shared disk controller or SAN.
I can see only Oracle on this market. I worked with such machines for
some time. One such a 8-node cluster costs a way over a million
dollars with initial hardware costing less that half of that.
Isn't it a good way to raise funds for Firebird development ?

-- 
Best regards,
 Nickolay Samofatov                     mailto:sk...@bs...