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

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Performance degrade after migrate db from NT to HP-UX

Re: Performance degrade after migrate db from NT to HP-UX

From: Eddy <eddyng_at_netvigator.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 10:37:31 +0800
Message-ID: <9916q2$9p43@imsp212.netvigator.com>

sort_area_size for HP is 10MB & NT is default, and the sort are retained size is default on both machine...

Jim Kennedy <kennedy-family_at_home.com> wrote in message news:lTTs6.584539$U46.17517189_at_news1.sttls1.wa.home.com...
> What is the sort area size set to on the HP and the NT box? If the query
> has an order by and the sort area size is set to the default it could be
> this. Batch might not make much of a difference with the sort area size
> setting also what is the sort_area_retained setting on both?
>
> Be good if you posted one of the queries and the explain plan on that
 query
> from both OS's
>
> Jim
>
> "Eddy" <eddyng_at_netvigator.com> wrote in message
> news:98vvtr$flr5_at_imsp212.netvigator.com...
> > We're using dedicated server with TNSNAMES only on HP-UX now. Both NT &
> > HP-UX on the same subnet and we're in client-server model by using
> > PowerBuilder, therefore, the startup time is the same, only when
 retriving
> > online data from db has different....
> >
> > Nuno Souto <nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam> wrote in message
> > news:3ab37e34.22081765_at_news-server...
> > > On Sat, 17 Mar 2001 22:27:36 +0800, "Eddy" <eddyng_at_netvigator.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >We've migrate our prod DB from Oracle 8.0.5 on NT to Oracle 8.0.5 on
 HP-UX
> > > >11.0. The HP9000 is definitely powerful than our existing NT in
 terms
 of
> > > >CPU power & memory. All batch jobs (including reports) run much
 faster
 than
> > > >previous (approx. 3~4 times faster), however, the online transaction
> > > >performance is degraded (e.g. a recordset need 3 seconds to load on
 NT
 &
 now
> > > >need more than 10 seconds).
> > > >
> > > >Any ideas? We try to allocate more memory to SGA, enable async-io at
 OS
> > > >level, turn off logging for temp tables ...etc. But still have no
 any
> > > >improvement.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If online is slower and batch faster, I'd look first at the setup for
> > > network and how it is being accessed. Do you have dedicated sessions
 

> > > or are you using MTS? That could make a difference. Is the slowness
> > > when the on-line program starts or is it all the way through while it
> > > is running? Are you using Names or not?
> > >
> > > Whatever, I think you need to look at the Net8 setup.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Nuno Souto
> > > nsouto_at_bigpond.net.au.nospam
> > > http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/the_Den/index.html
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Sat Mar 17 2001 - 20:37:31 CST

Original text of this message

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