Message-ID: <432781B7.9060500@bea.com> Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:49:43 -0700 From: Joe Weinstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server To: Mark Bole Subject: Re: pros/cons of dedicated vs. MTS connections? References: <43274985$1@news.beasys.com> <43276AE6.2040706@bea.com> <03LVe.712$Jm.449@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> In-Reply-To: <03LVe.712$Jm.449@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.148.48.12 X-Trace: news.beasys.com 1126662463 216.148.48.12 (13 Sep 2005 18:47:43 -0700) Organization: BEA SYSTEMS Inc Lines: 64 Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!colt.net!news.nl.colt.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!feeder.enertel.nl!nntpfeed-01.ops.asmr-01.energis-idc.net!216.196.110.149.MISMATCH!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feeder2.news.jippii.net!feeder1.news.jippii.net!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!spool.news.uu.net!ash.uu.net!news.beasys.com!not-for-mail Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu comp.databases.oracle.server:251448 Thank you very much. Much appreciated. Joe Mark Bole wrote: > Joe Weinstein wrote: > >> >> Mark Bole wrote: >> >>> Joe Weinstein wrote: >>> > [...] > >> >> Hi Mark! Yes I continue to forge my own posts! ;) >> I have recently discovered I don't know everything. ;) > > [...] > >> I appreciate your confirmation about a dedicated server. >> Is there any official Oracle documentation stating such >> as clearly as that? Or can you point me to a post that >> delineates why? >> thanks again! >> Joe Weinstein at BEA > > > Joe: > > FWIW, following is an excerpt of an in-house e-mail I wrote in January > 2002. This was Oracle version 8.1.6, as I recall (I don't recall the > Java version, probably 1.2 or something). This test did not include a > JDBC connection pool, but rather plain vanilla JDBC (OCI) connection > initiated via a batch job. Since I cannot post anything more specific, > this should be categorized as "anecdotal". However it was sufficient to > convince the client (customer of both Oracle and BEA) to abandon MTS > forever (and, incidentally, MTS isn't even a good or correct name, which > is why it's known as "shared server" these days). > > "Here [spreadsheet attached] is some experimentally controlled data that > I collected on the performance of MTS and Java. For the first time, I > can say that I have seen some hard evidence of performance problems due > solely to MTS vs dedicated server for Oracle. What's VERY interesting is > that the difference is MUCH more pronounced when it's a matter of Java > and Oracle processes running concurrently [on the same server]. The > difference was almost negligible for pure Oracle-to-Oracle transactions > (meaning, on our production database server, this experiment does not > predict any great difference due to MTS, which I think we've seen to be > the case). > > [...] > > "Results: for the portion of [...] which involves creating new tables > from old tables, there was a very slight improvement under the dedicated > server config. Also, the tests without MTS were more consistent (lower > standard deviation). For the portion of the [...] run that involves > Java code (the XML extract), the MTS results were 2-4 times slower, and > the deviations (variance) were signifcantly higher." > > -Mark Bole > >