Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Sun to Linux on Dell

RE: Sun to Linux on Dell

From: Matthew Zito <mzito_at_gridapp.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:45:26 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.005AF44D.20030611092959@fatcity.com>

 
If
they're already using a fibre channel array, moving to a SAN is not going to inherently improve performance.  It's moving to the bigger array that offers the performance improvement generally (which can be done through direct-connect fibre channel if so desired).  Large cache regions, more spindles, better read-ahead algorithms, etc. etc.  The flip side of that, though, is that all of the TPC benchmarks you see shun the large monolithic arrays (HP, EMC, HDS, etc.) in favor of lots and lots of small JBODs and fibre arrays, because they can afford to throw 900+ spindles at the problem and deal with getting it configured once.  This ignores the ongoing nightmare of mananging 900 individual disks, of course.  <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> 
But
for a database that's only 76GB, its going to be hard to find a cost-effective fibre channel array that is really smart.  A little baby clariion cx200 or HP VA 7100 could probably do the trick, but it depends on what they're using now.  Look at iostat, sar, etc.  - what's the throughput to the array(s)?  What's the average service time overall?  Are there particular hotspots?  It might be possible to mitigate the performance problems by moving seriously I/O intensive tablespaces onto a solid-state disk or just by reconfiguring the layout to more intelligently distribute the load.  Or maybe just adding more disks worth of cheap storage, rather than buying an expensive array.  YMMV
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2> 
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Thanks,
<FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Matt
--Matthew ZitoGridApp SystemsEmail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Cell: 646-220-3551Phone: 212-358-8211 x 359<A href="http://www.gridapp.com/">http://www.gridapp.com <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">   

  <FONT
  face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----From:   [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of   [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:49   AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:   Sun to Linux on Dell
  I'd
  go Windows on the Dell box.  There are some quite nice tools like perfmon   that can give you a lot of info about what is going on.  My preferred   Windows box though would be the Proliant, it's earned it's reputation over   time for performance and reliability.
  <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
  size=2> 
  <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
  size=2>Problem with a big system though is the cost of the port.  I'd   tend to stick with a SUN box with a SAN but do the sums.   <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
  size=2> 
  If
  you want sheer performance dump the disk drives except a couple mirrored for   the operating system then go something like an HP SAN.  We've seen thirty   fold improvement on some databases going SAN keeping the same   server.
  <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
  size=2> 
  <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
  size=2>Cheerio John        

<FONT

    face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Michael Kline     [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: June 9, 2003 1:14     PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Sun     to Linux on Dell
    I have a cust
    pounding a Sun E450 I believe they
    said it was
    with a large RAID with fiber channels.
<FONT

    face="Courier New"> 
    They pound this
    thing at 2,037 I/O per seconds and
    end up having
    about 3,868 I/O per data block wait.     This is
    averaged over 3-5 days, 24 hr/day, so there     are times it's
    way over that. While sometimes slow,     performance is
    acceptable most of the time.
<FONT

    face="Courier New"> 
    They are
    contemplating moving it to Linux and a     very high end
    Dell system, perhaps 4-8 CPU, etc.
<FONT

    face="Courier New"> 
    I've always
    heard Sun was pretty much the best
    on heavy I/O
    and if it were not for the
    fiber channels,
    they would probably have
    been hurting
    big time some time ago.
<FONT

    face="Courier New"> 
    They are only
    in R&D right now, but has anyone
    done a move of
    this nature?
<FONT

    face="Courier New"> 
    The database is
    Siebel with many mods and
    sub systems,
    average tuned, about 76gb. It
    is about 139
    million records. They are around
    200 users or
    so.
<FONT

    face="Courier New"> 
<FONT

    face="Courier New">Maks
     
     
<FONT

face="Courier New">  Received on Wed Jun 11 2003 - 11:45:26 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US