Different releasse levels by instance is only supported on UNIX and
Linux (for now).

On large UNIX SMP's, I would always recommend one database per instance
to get the benefits of isolation - so a problem in one database is
isolated to one instance. The resources overhead per instance is low.
Also, registry variables and database config parameters are set at the
instance level (and can require the database to be stopped and restarted
to pick up new settings in some cases) - another benefit of isolation.

Chuck wrote:

> While on the topic of multiple instances, I have a question. What's the
> benefit of having multiple instances instead of one instance with
> multiple databases? --
> Chuck
> Remove "_nospam" to reply by email
>
> Pierre Saint-Jacques <sescons@attglobal.net> wrote in
> news:TUbqc.55457$PJ1.541502@wagner.videotron.net:
>
>
>>You can look in the DB2 Admin. Guide Performance.
>>There'S a discussion there about memory utilisation.
>>You'll find it is not so much the instance as the active db's that
>>consume memory resources.
>>
>>On the systems we use to teach, using Win2K, the DAS and the active
>>instance take about 55MB of memory. Whereas the db can "chew up" as
>>much as 1.5GB.
>>
>>Iwould think that, unlees you are SMP (MultiProcessors) enabled, after
>>starting the DAS, you could use 30MB per started instance.
>>
>>Also visiting the Admin. Guide, investigate the parms. in the DBM CFG.
>>Search in Google with" db2 and performance", all the DB2 docs. can be
>>searched with Google.
>>
>>HTH, Pierre.
>>
>>Mike wrote:
>>
>>>Looking to find any information on how to properly configure multiple
>>>instances of DB2. This is on Win2k db2 ver 7.2. I am basically
>>>looking for information on how the multiple instance settings should
>>>configured to work, how memory is shared or not, etc. I can not seem
>>>to find any good links to this information.
>>>Thanks,
>>>Mike
>>
>