| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Which Tuning Method? System/Resource Tuning?
Hi Wisdom,
I'm not quite sure what you were saying about the directio because I'm not familiar with the Sun's hardware/admin configuration, here's my current vfstab file setting, would you please take a look my directio is setting correctly or not:
#device device mount FS fsck mount mount #to mount to fsck point type pass at boot options # #/dev/dsk/c1d0s2 /dev/rdsk/c1d0s2 /usr ufs 1 yes - fd - /dev/fd fd - no - /proc - /proc proc - no - /dev/vx/dsk/swapvol - - swap - no - /dev/vx/dsk/rootvol /dev/vx/rdsk/rootvol / ufs 1 no - /dev/vx/dsk/var /dev/vx/rdsk/var /var ufs 1 no - /dev/vx/dsk/home /dev/vx/rdsk/home /export/home ufs 2 yes - swap - /tmp tmpfs - yes - #NOTE: volume rootvol (/) encapsulated partition c0t0d0s0 #NOTE: volume swapvol (swap) encapsulated partition c0t0d0s1#NOTE: volume var (/var) encapsulated partition c0t0d0s3 #NOTE: volume home (/export/home) encapsulated partition c0t0d0s7 /dev/vx/dsk/xtradg/xtra /dev/vx/rdsk/xtradg/xtra /xtra ufs 3 yes -
epwarchive:/EpwArchive - /epwarchive nfs - yes bg,nosuid epwarchive:/EpwImage - /epwimage nfs - yes bg,nosuid epwarchive:/SmartStor - /epwbackup nfs - yes bg,nosuid
Thanks,
Vance.
"Wisdom" <wisdom_crying_out_at_hotREMOVEmail.com> wrote in message news:<Ax3G7.234684$K6.112937548_at_news2>...
> Vance,
>
> The biggest bang for the buck on Solaris 8 is using directio with Oracle.
> If you don't mount your filesystems containing datafile using directio, do
> it now or you are double buffering all the data and wasting memory and CPU
> cycles.
>
> Example of /etc/vfstab entry for directio
> /dev/md/dsk/d120 /dev/md/rdsk/d120 /u08 ufs 2 yes
> forcedirectio
>
> Also, verify that you have all the SCSI cards in your Sun spread out across
> all the PCI buses. By default Sun stuffs all the cards on the first PCI bus
> thus the layout is not optimized from the factory. Look in the E450 manual
> to see what card slot is on which bus.
>
> Another performance increase can be gained my populating the the SIMM banks
> in pairs with identical chips so that the memory will interleave. I am not
> exactly sure how much increase this gives throughput-wise but it should make
> memory access twice as fast.
>
> And once you do all that, the PIII is still going to blow the doors off the
> E450 for single threaded type activities like import/exports. I can't
> believe how fast the commodity PC hardware has become. I built a single
> processor PIII 850 and it was 300-700% faster than a 4 x 300 Mhz E450
> depending on the type operation. Also, this was SCSI vs. IDE too.
>
> The thing you have to keep in mind is that the E450 is about 5 years old and
> the PIII's and PIV's are only a couple years old. Think 386 vs. pentium if
> you can remember back that far. The PC technology has definately
> leapfrogged Sun's old stuff, but Sun supposedly has new stuff out, but I
> haven't tried any of it yet. Sun has got to get moving or they are going
> to be in even bigger trouble.
>
> Let us know how it works out....
>
>
>
> "Vance Wu" <vwu_at_anacomp.com> wrote in message
> news:c3d4638a.0111061055.36988298_at_posting.google.com...
> > Hi Friends,
> >
> > I need your help, I have two machines A and B:
> >
> > Machine A: SUN Ultra Enterprise 450, 2GM memory single processor,
> > running
> > Oracle 8.1.6
> >
> > Machine B: Intel Pentium III, 550Mhz, 512MB memory, running Oracle
> > 8.1.7
> >
> > Machine A is supposed to be a lot faster than machine B. Two machines
> > are
> > loaded identical databases for development purpose including same
> > amount of
> > data, same set of tables, indexes, stored procedures ..
> >
> > I have performance problem on machine A, I believe I need
> > system/resource tuning
> > instead of SQLstatement/Application tuning because two databases are
> > almost identical except may be some of the system buffers are slightly
> > different.
> >
> > When I execute one particular query on machine A it took 15 seconds,
> > but on
> > machine B, it took less than 2 seconds.
> >
> > The following is statistics information from v$sesstat that I captured
> > on two
> > machines, when I started with a new session and executed only that one
> > particular query. The comparison listed contains only different
> > statistics numbers, the remaining statistic number are the same.
> >
> > NAME Machine A Machine B
> > ----------------------------------- --------- ---------
> > recursive cpu usage 1160 4
> > session logical reads 52592 306
> > CPU used when call started 1163 10
> > CPU used by this session 1163 10
> > session uga memory 212764 203800
> > session uga memory max 221036 212072
> > messages sent 2 1
> > session pga memory 577636 389408
> > session pga memory max 577636 389408
> > total file opens 2 0
> > db block gets 213 215
> > consistent gets 52379 91
> > physical reads 47939 0
> > change write time 0 1
> > redo synch time 6 2
> > free buffer requested 47941 1
> > dirty buffers inspected 1 0
> > free buffer inspected 1 0
> > prefetched blocks 22 0
> > redo entries 5 6
> > redo size 1568 1572
> > no work - consistent read gets 52346 58
> > table scan blocks gotten 123 51
> > table fetch by rowid 1120840 12
> > bytes sent via SQL*Net to client 2898 3600
> > bytes received via SQL*Net from client 11403 12506
> > cursor authentications 0 1
> > buffer is pinned count 2192418 2
> > buffer is not pinned count 49388 76
> >
> > The big differences between two machines are the "recursive cpu
> > usage",
> > "session logical reads", "table fetch by rowid", "buffer is pinned
> > count",
> > "buffer is not pinned count", "physical reads" and "consistent gets".
> > Can anybody guide me to the right tuning method on system A.
> >
> > Thank you in advance,
> > Vance Wu.
Received on Wed Nov 07 2001 - 17:49:18 CST
 |
 |