Re: HELP! Need ammo against Oracle on NT!!

jacob bogers wrote in message <01be2b96$5573e520$17e6f1c3_at_msn01>...
>I had a project migrating an OTL (online transaction system)
>application from os2 TO WINDOWS nt4.0 at ricoh espc in amsterdam
>holland. NT40 clogged up when about 30 people where accessing the
>database concurrently. (adding an extra processor, raid10 controller,
>and 256meg (yes!) of memory to the machine didn't help at all. Not even a
>slight improvement. (I learned the hard way that NT40 isn't scalable.)
>After close examination it seems that NT40 stops when to many processes
>(28 to be exactly) are waiting for blocking IO. The kernel doesn't get
>any processor time at all, (flat-line on the task manager monitor)!!

I do not agree with your diagnosis doctor. :-)

<rant>
Why would the NT kernel hang on 28 blocking I/O calls and not 27 calls, or 20 calls, or 15 calls? This simply does not make sense (neither does Microsoft I know, but that is not the point). I've seen NT being used in "mission critical" corporate environments, running SQL-Server <shudder> on NT 3.5 and then 4.0 with close to a 1000 users (up to 400+ concurrent users). The problems faced (and this is now over a period of about 2 years) were:

1 - SQL-Server (index problems)
2 - SQL-Server (dbcc problems)
3 - SQL-Server (record/page locking problems)
4 - Milex controller/driver problem
5 - more assorted SQL-Server problems

Never NT. OK, I'll be one of the first to say that if you want to run serious stuff, rather use Unix. But NT can do the job - definately not as well as Unix, but that does not diminishes the fact that NT IS and CAN be used as a high-end high-volume transaction server.

The fact that in the above scenario described by Jacob Bogers, they threw more hardware at the problem simply shows IMHO a total lack of understanding in how to troubleshoot and solve performance problems. Throwing more hardware at the problem is a typical sales attitude for very obvious reasons. And I've seen this happen. Lots of times. And then the operating system is blamed. Yeah, I've seen that too. Plenty of times.

According to you Jacob, the NT kernel does not get any processor time!? For heaven's sake man, do you have -any- idea on how operating systems work! NT is -not- Windows'95. On Unix, I've seen outstanding i/o calls cause a system activity report (man sar for info) many a times as '0% Kernel' and '99% Waiting for I/O'. According to you that also means that the Unix kernel is not getting any CPU time! Next time, give a bit more though at -what- the performance stats are saying and do not simply drew blind conclusions.

As I said before in many of my previous rants - just give me HARD FACTS when you want to knock a piece of software. To be blunt, I find this NT SUCKS! a piece of smelly bs when it's not backed up by -real- technical reasons. Hell, I knock MS everytime I get the opportunity and think BG is The Asshole. But when it comes to operating systems and databases, set personal obsessions and religious crusades aside and judge the product on its technical capabilities.
</rant>

Oh well, I have to swing my lead pipe every now or else it gets rusty...

regards,
Billy Received on Tue Dec 22 1998 - 01:13:24 CST