Comments inline
--
Syltrem
OpenVMS 7.3-1 + Oracle 8.1.7.4
http://pages.infinit.net/syltrem (OpenVMS related web site, en français)
---zulu is not in my email address---
"Frank van Bortel" <fvanbortel_at_netscape.net> a écrit dans le message de
news:cfcq7f$isp$1_at_news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl...
> Syltrem wrote:
> > Both BEQ and TCP should give the same performance, but BEQ for clients
on
> > the same machine as your db server may be a better choice.
> > BEQ is a "more direct" way to communicate. I don't know what principle
it
> > uses on Unix (OpenVMS is my religion) but if you use TCP you get in
> > concurrence with all other TCP traffic. On heavily loaded networks, this
may
> > impact your Oracle throughput.
> >
> > Here for local clients I use BEQ, for all others I use TCP.
> > I once had a performance problem (in the beginning) and had to set
> > TCP.NODELAY=TRUE in PROTOCOL.ORA, but after that I had the exact same
> > performance using either one.
> >
> > HTH
> >
>
> Hard to believe, as TCP has all the overhead
> of communicating over (bad!) telephone lines,
> whereas BEQ (or IPC, for that matter) does not.
>
AFAIK, BEQ is only for clients running on the db server node. I would think
this is true for all platforms.
So that excludes telephone lines etc.
I was talking about clients connecting from node 1 or node 2 of the same
OpenVMS Alpha cluster, to the database that runs on either node (of course
BEQ will only work for clients running on node 1 if the db server is on node
1).
We experience the same speed with TCP or BEQ in this config.
> OTOH, TCP implementations differ per platform,
> per vendor, so your experience may differ from
> mine.
> I *know* IBM had a TCP patch for AIX 4.3.3; for
> performance reasons.
> --
>
> Regards,
> Frank van Bortel
>
Received on Wed Aug 11 2004 - 07:50:03 CDT
