Path: news.cambrium.nl!textnews.cambrium.nl!feeder3.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!newsfeed0.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!194.109.133.85.MISMATCH!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!news.skynet.be!195.238.0.222.MISMATCH!newsspl501.isp.belgacom.be!tjb!not-for-mail Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:03:59 +0100 From: "Gerard H. Pille" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Debian-1.1.9-5;en-US; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080313 Firefox/2.0.0.14 Compatible SeaMonkey/1.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server Subject: Re: rman ? nfs ? slow References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 71 Message-ID: <495cb0cd$0$2854$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be> Organization: -= Belgacom Usenet Service =- NNTP-Posting-Host: 7eb57541.news.skynet.be X-Trace: 1230811341 news.skynet.be 2854 81.244.124.72:63151 X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@skynet.be Xref: news.cambrium.nl lfree schreef: > I use rman backup product database on OS windows(2003 R2 standard 64 > edition ) ,I check to find > it is slow (vs Linux rhel 4.3 ). My nfs server use SFU for windows. > > windows: > > => select * from v$version ; > BANNER > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bi > PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production > CORE 10.2.0.4.0 Production > TNS for 64-bit Windows: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production > NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production > > SELECT start_time, end_time, status, input_type, elapsed_seconds, > compression_ratio, TRIM (input_bytes_display) inputb, > TRIM (output_bytes_display) outputb, > TRIM (input_bytes_per_sec_display) input, > TRIM (output_bytes_per_sec_display) output, > TRIM (time_taken_display) TIME > FROM v$rman_backup_job_details > WHERE start_time > TRUNC (SYSDATE) - 1; > > START_TIME END_TIME STATUS INPUT_TYPE > ELAPSED_SECONDS COMPRESSION_RATIO INPUTB OUTPUTB INPUT OUTPUT TIME > ------------------- ------------------- ---------------- ---------- -------- > ------- ----------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ---------- > 2008-12-31 20:03:06 2008-12-31 20:19:37 COMPLETED ARCHIVELOG > 991 2.59272 1.02G 402.88M 1.05M 416.29K 00:16:31 > > output_bytes_per_sec_display = 416.29K. > > linux : > > BANNER > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.3.0 - 64bi > PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.3.0 - Production > CORE 10.2.0.3.0 Production > TNS for Linux: Version 10.2.0.3.0 - Production > NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.3.0 - Production > > START_TIME END_TIME STATUS INPUT_TYPE > ELAPSED_SECONDS COMPRESSION_RATIO INPUTB OUTPUTB INPUT OUTPUT TIME > ------------------- ------------------- ---------------- ---------- -------- > ------- ----------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ---------- > 2009-01-01 02:10:17 2009-01-01 02:17:51 COMPLETED ARCHIVELOG > 454 2.72805 2.91G 1.07G 6.56M 2.40M 00:07:34 > 2008-12-31 02:10:17 2008-12-31 02:16:25 COMPLETED ARCHIVELOG > 368 2.59673 2.25G 888.76M 6.27M 2.42M 00:06:08 > > output_bytes_per_sec_display = 2.4M > > in windows, I use to copy command , archive filesiez = 42M ,it takes only > 2-3sĄŁ > copy arch... \\192.168.25.100\backup > > why? > > thank advanced. > > You are taking a backup on system A (Linux or Whinedoze) while the data is in fact on system B (your NFS)? Not such a good idea. In which case your problem could be network related. I don't find it strange that Linux could beat Whinedoze on network throughput. Gerard