Classic and SuperClassic differences (possibly in future)

[Tommi Prami]

Hello,

Searched for information on this and it seems that there are no major changes since FB2.5.x. If I am mistaken, please feel free to educate me.

I was just pondering that in SuperClassic there could be a possibility to move it a bit closer to the super server. Don't know internals and/or technical limitations etc in this.

Seems to me, complöete noob on the Firebird architecture, that superserver could share some cachesd for all connections per database. Possibly it would need to be configurable, maybe not.

For me it seems that this could save some resources on the server and maybe give some performance gains. But this is just a feeling. I have no idea that it would be possible or even close to smart to make such a change.

Just my 0.02€.

-Tee-

[Tommi Prami]

Hello,

No discussion, in any directions. No one agrees, but no disagreement either. Weird...

My idea is,  since super classic is single process. Threads that use same database could share some caches. Signaling, locking etc between threads can be made faster that inter process ones, I  think.

So there could be some caches that could be shared between threads for better speed and/or less resource usage.

If not feasible etc, would like to know why, so could understand Firebird internal architecture better.

-tee-

[Mark Rotteveel]

On 23/08/2025 07:58, Tommi Prami wrote:
> Hello,
>
> No discussion, in any directions. No one agrees, but no disagreement
> either. Weird...
>
> My idea is,  since super classic is single process. Threads that use
> same database could share some caches. Signaling, locking etc between
> threads can be made faster that inter process ones, I  think.
>
> So there could be some caches that could be shared between threads for
> better speed and/or less resource usage.

That sounds essentially like SuperServer, so what would be the difference?

Mark
--
Mark Rotteveel