Return-Path: X-Original-To: oracle-l@orafaq.com Delivered-To: oracle-l@orafaq.com Received: from puck1183.startdedicated.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by puck1183.startdedicated.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C6791960AA5 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 22:55:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from turing.freelists.org (turing.freelists.org [206.53.239.180]) by puck1183.startdedicated.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 22:55:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 0992E6209E; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:55:29 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at turing.freelists.org Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 50sDzPprs4gI; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:55:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 314BE620A8; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:55:16 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:53:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 3AA2962057 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:53:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MUas8z0E5Wsl for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:53:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail-it0-f50.google.com (mail-it0-f50.google.com [209.85.214.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id 08DEB62054 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 16:53:53 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-it0-f50.google.com with SMTP id q124so3259755itd.1 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:53:53 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from :organization:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=rv7ug/aGjzw049EhAF5Fl67QXWkRzDYm6mWP6drVYtk=; b=Hp8yUsSql6BYrFL5bJ5wFh0QrTdfurcgrbyfOf2LJedAOSpJnpVrjC8CGdEMen0VnF GbEaIJ6Z9vhYtLpldVLC0nyn8dwmlnzhzN4e7f0KACNQ936nomK5EFfyFP5YhUNOyswT n18XwxdLgHpAlKoUIfjcDCcGCnSDxEE8p3971dWpn1RUaOpXVwgEIYoo4ihtMGf1xUj5 9tMshz8oxbMdAZPlOSQP4HzBrCXwRkpRcHy2k0UPFD+oGe9eeOiBkgVYG+yCy9jt+x0C uYDauxCbQwLPak5HCaG2WWYXqzLXOpS+ZE4fdu71YCdzYywu7+w2xCVIF0nraCeItrZU XUYw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcCfvq7PuHRsDFk2Gy2aDgcREJIHk+3vA6daF1cISq0GA90Km4QzDW0fEpT8DXAOA== X-Received: by 10.107.150.10 with SMTP id y10mr8614968iod.27.1478901232928; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:53:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from Tim-MBP.local (184-96-137-207.hlrn.qwest.net. [184.96.137.207]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id h78sm4604952ioe.44.2016.11.11.13.53.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:53:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: jumbo frames with non rac References: <441952295.2260945.1478884537701@mail.yahoo.com> <012601d23c57$9cd51fc0$d67f5f40$@comcast.net> To: Jeff Chirco Cc: Dimensional DBA , alfredo.abate@gmail.com, kathy duret , "oracle-l@freelists.org" From: Tim Gorman Organization: EvDBT Message-ID: <10be42cf-2820-cbf9-bb4c-89adb540ff3a@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 14:54:27 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------645BD32B9F511994358688FC" X-archive-position: 66826 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: tim.evdbt@gmail.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: tim.evdbt@gmail.com List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: oracle-l X-List-ID: oracle-l List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: oracle-l --------------645BD32B9F511994358688FC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jeff, Hopefully, specific subnets have been configured for network-attach storage (NAS) and/or backup traffic only, segregated from general-purpose public networks. This will make reconfiguring intermediate devices (i.e. switches, routers, etc) to jumbo frames a less-intrusive project. Good luck, -Tim On 11/11/16 13:50, Jeff Chirco wrote: > Thanks Tim well point. I think at this point for us it is more of a > proactive preventive measure. We are in the process of moving our > database servers from Windows to Linux so I say why not just go with > jumbo frames now if it is not too much cost and trouble especially > with all the testing we will be doing for the OS conversion. Better > than trying to do it later. > > Jeff > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Tim Gorman > wrote: > > To augment what both Matthew and Alfredo have said... > > TCP "jumbo frames" are used mainly with network-attached storage > (i.e. NFS, iSCSI, etc) and for special use-cases like the Oracle > RAC interconnect. The standard 1500-byte packets are sized to > optimally accommodate network traffic ranging from acknowledgement > messages of a few bytes to database storage traffic of 8192 bytes > and larger. > > Larger packet sizes doesn't make the packets move any faster over > the wire or through switches and routers, but simply results in > fewer packets because an 8192-byte database block fits within one > 9000-byte packet, instead of requiring six 1500-byte packets. > This results in fewer un-marshalling operations on the source > server and fewer marshalling operations on the destination server, > so the ultimate increase in network throughput actually comes from > less CPU consumption by the servers on either end of the network > connection. The CPU savings on each server, as well as the > network throughput, can be significant, but when there is a > consistently high volume of such large-packet traffic. In > low-volume situations, it is difficult to measure any benefit. > > CPU-saturated servers using network-attached storage without jumbo > frames can result in poor I/O performance without network > saturation being detectable. DBAs will report the poor I/O > latency and throughput over NFS storage, but the network > administrator will correctly respond that there is no network > throughput or latency issues. Meanwhile, server administrators > will surely detect the CPU saturation, but not associate it with > the poor I/O performance over NAS, likely because they won't be > involved in the I/O performance discussion, and neither the DBA > nor the network admin will make the connection. > > So, deploying jumbo frames can be a reactive measure when CPU > saturation is detected and associated to NAS I/O issues, or it can > be a proactive measure to prevent that situation. > > > > > > On 11/11/16 13:10, Dimensional DBA wrote: >> >> As Alfredo mentions you normally don’t use jumbo frames on the >> public facing networks as none of the clients normally have jumbo >> frames setup. This could be different if you were using say >> citrix desktops and ewveryone used those to access their >> applications then what you want may work. >> >> I have also used jumbo frames on storage networks to netapps or >> other network storage. >> >> *Matthew Parker* >> >> *Chief Technologist* >> >> *Dimensional DBA* >> >> *425-891-7934 (cell)* >> >> *D&B *047931344** >> >> *CAGE *7J5S7** >> >> *Dimensional.dba@comcast.net * >> >> *View Matthew Parker's profile on LinkedIn* >> >> >> www.dimensionaldba.com >> >> *From:*oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org >> >> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org >> ] *On Behalf Of *Alfredo Abate >> *Sent:* Friday, November 11, 2016 11:55 AM >> *To:* Jeff Chirco >> *Cc:* kathy duret; oracle-l@freelists.org >> >> *Subject:* Re: jumbo frames with non rac >> >> Jeff, >> >> My understanding of using jumbo frames with Oracle RAC is to be >> able to increase the packet size of the */private interconnect/* >> (heartbeat) of the cluster for better performance. This is >> normally done on segregated switches (or switch ports), NICs, etc >> so that they are all configured for the larger MTU size (9000). >> >> If you are considering enabling jumbo frames on the *public >> network* of a single instance (or even RAC) database server that >> your application servers or end users will directly be connecting >> to it can cause issues since most networks are configured for the >> normal MTU size (1500). This mismatch will potentially cause >> network issues such as packet drops when the two devices are >> communicating with each other. >> >> Alfredo >> >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Jeff Chirco >> > wrote: >> >> Sorry yes Oracle Linux 7 here and with hugepages. 11g database >> currently but plans to 12c. >> >> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:15 AM, kathy duret >> > wrote: >> >> I am assuming Linux here ... >> >> You will also need to set up hugepages and there are some other >> settings to consider like semaphores. >> >> There are many papers on how to do set this up. I would look on >> MOS first and then go fro there. >> >> *Kathy Duret* >> >> ** >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> *From:*Jeff Chirco > > >> *To:* "oracle-l@freelists.org " >> > >> *Sent:* Friday, November 11, 2016 10:30 AM >> *Subject:* jumbo frames with non rac >> >> We are in the middle of setting up replacing new database servers >> and been wondering about jumbo frames. We have 10gb network and >> we don't run RAC and not sure if we ever will but wondering if >> there still is a big benefit for jumbo frames? We also are >> running a new NetApp all flash storage. >> >> From what I have read so far is yes there is a benefit but just >> wondering if anyone has any opinions? I am not very knowledgeable >> on the network side of things. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jeff >> > > --------------645BD32B9F511994358688FC Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Jeff,

Hopefully, specific subnets have been configured for network-attach storage (NAS) and/or backup traffic only, segregated from general-purpose public networks.  This will make reconfiguring intermediate devices (i.e. switches, routers, etc) to jumbo frames a less-intrusive project.

Good luck,

-Tim



On 11/11/16 13:50, Jeff Chirco wrote:
Thanks Tim well point.  I think at this point for us it is more of a proactive preventive measure.  We are in the process of moving our database servers from Windows to Linux so I say why not just go with jumbo frames now if it is not too much cost and trouble especially with all the testing we will be doing for the OS conversion.  Better than trying to do it later.

Jeff

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Tim Gorman <tim.evdbt@gmail.com> wrote:
To augment what both Matthew and Alfredo have said...

TCP "jumbo frames" are used mainly with network-attached storage (i.e. NFS, iSCSI, etc) and for special use-cases like the Oracle RAC interconnect.  The standard 1500-byte packets are sized to optimally accommodate network traffic ranging from acknowledgement messages of a few bytes to database storage traffic of 8192 bytes and larger.

Larger packet sizes doesn't make the packets move any faster over the wire or through switches and routers, but simply results in fewer packets because an 8192-byte database block fits within one 9000-byte packet, instead of requiring six 1500-byte packets.  This results in fewer un-marshalling operations on the source server and fewer marshalling operations on the destination server, so the ultimate increase in network throughput actually comes from less CPU consumption by the servers on either end of the network connection.  The CPU savings on each server, as well as the network throughput, can be significant, but when there is a consistently high volume of such large-packet traffic.  In low-volume situations, it is difficult to measure any benefit.

CPU-saturated servers using network-attached storage without jumbo frames can result in poor I/O performance without network saturation being detectable.  DBAs will report the poor I/O latency and throughput over NFS storage, but the network administrator will correctly respond that there is no network throughput or latency issues.  Meanwhile, server administrators will surely detect the CPU saturation, but not associate it with the poor I/O performance over NAS, likely because they won't be involved in the I/O performance discussion, and neither the DBA nor the network admin will make the connection.

So, deploying jumbo frames can be a reactive measure when CPU saturation is detected and associated to NAS I/O issues, or it can be a proactive measure to prevent that situation.





On 11/11/16 13:10, Dimensional DBA wrote:

As Alfredo mentions you normally don’t use jumbo frames on the public facing networks as none of the clients normally have jumbo frames setup. This could be different if you were using say citrix desktops and ewveryone used those to access their applications then what you want may work.

I have also used jumbo frames on storage networks to netapps or other network storage.

 

Matthew Parker

Chief Technologist

Dimensional DBA

425-891-7934 (cell)

D&B 047931344

CAGE 7J5S7

Dimensional.dba@comcast.net

View Matthew Parker's profile on LinkedIn

www.dimensionaldba.com

 

From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of Alfredo Abate
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2016 11:55 AM
To: Jeff Chirco
Cc: kathy duret; oracle-l@freelists.org
Subject: Re: jumbo frames with non rac

 

Jeff,

 

My understanding of using jumbo frames with Oracle RAC is to be able to increase the packet size of the private interconnect (heartbeat) of the cluster for better performance.  This is normally done on segregated switches (or switch ports), NICs, etc so that they are all configured for the larger MTU size (9000).

 

If you are considering enabling jumbo frames on the public network of a single instance (or even RAC) database server that your application servers or end users will directly be connecting to it can cause issues since most networks are configured for the normal MTU size (1500).  This mismatch will potentially cause network issues such as packet drops when the two devices are communicating with each other.

 

Alfredo

 

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Jeff Chirco <backseatdba@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry yes Oracle Linux 7 here and with hugepages.  11g database currently but plans to 12c.

 

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:15 AM, kathy duret <katpopins21@yahoo.com> wrote:

I am assuming Linux here ...

 

You will also need to set up hugepages and there are some other settings to consider like semaphores. 

 

There are many papers on how to do set this up.  I would look on MOS first and then go fro there.

 

Kathy Duret

 

 

From: Jeff Chirco <backseatdba@gmail.com>
To: "oracle-l@freelists.org" <oracle-l@freelists.org>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2016 10:30 AM
Subject: jumbo frames with non rac

 

We are in the middle of setting up replacing new database servers and been wondering about jumbo frames.  We have 10gb network and we don't run RAC and not sure if we ever will but wondering if there still is a big benefit for jumbo frames? We also are running a new NetApp all flash storage.

From what I have read so far is yes there is a benefit but just wondering if anyone has any opinions? I am not very knowledgeable on the network side of things.

Thanks,

Jeff

 

 

 




--------------645BD32B9F511994358688FC-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l