Re: What is up with ISM?

From: David Freitag <dovidf_at_net2phone.com>
Date: 1998/06/10
Message-ID: <6lmbnd$k3v@nnrp1.farm.idt.net>#1/1

Anthony Mandic wrote in message <357DE571.50D2CE79_at_agd.nsw.gov.au_x>...
>
> The previous poster stated that the Sun4u architecture never had
> ISM because the hardware to support it wasn't there. So this rules
> it out for your E150 as well.

This is not correct and enable_ism worked on the 150.

>By the look of it, I'd say it more
> than likely a config issue with the size of shared memory and
> its process usage. If you investigate what had changed in your
> config between the E150 and the E3000, you shoud be able to spot
> the problem.

We originally transferred over with no change to our configuration by restoring a backup from the old system. The larger, faster system should have been faster without any other modification.

> It could be overallocating shared memory or it
> could be that your database application isn't well designed to
> run in an SMP environment.

If it worked on a single processor system with less of everything, it should work at least as well on the larger system. Could SMP actually reduce performance?

David Received on Wed Jun 10 1998 - 00:00:00 CDT