Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:04:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:04:09 -0500 Received: from adsl-64-164-18-186.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net ([64.164.18.186]:49731 "HELO switchmanagement.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:04:01 -0500 Message-ID: <3C0FF958.5030703@switchmanagement.com> Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:03:52 -0800 From: Brian Strand Organization: Switch Management User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.6+) Gecko/20011206 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: robert.gehr@web2cad.de CC: linux-kernel Subject: Re: Oracle In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org robert.gehr@web2cad.de wrote: >Hello Brian > >Sorry for contacting you directly but I could not find any anser in the >kernel archive concerning the Problem you described. > No problem. I am cc:ing lkml in case anyone else shares this problem, hopefully you don't mind? > >I face a similiar Problem which is as follows: > >I wanted to migrate an Oracle Database from a Prliant Server PentiumII >450Mhz, 450MB, Wide SCSI Raid 5, Kernel 2.2.10, >Oracle Version 8.1.7 running under Suse 6.2 on an ext2 Filesystem > >The new machine is a bit faster concerning the hardware: Proliant Server >PentiumIII 600Mhz, 512MB , Ultra2 SCSI Raid 5, Oracle 8.1.7 Suse 7.2 >Kernel 2.4.16 > >I followed the thread and kicked out reiser, replaced it with ext2, >installed kernel 2.2.20 and tried all those combinations to and fro with >the flippin result that the new machine is about 2-3 times slower than the >old one on every combination imaginable. So much for newer kernels, >filesystems etc. > >Have you found a solution to the problem you described in November. If so I >would be thankful to know > Our current best known 2.4.x setup is Suse 7.2 with stock 2.4.16 with Oracle 8.1.7, running large tablespaces (i.e. temp, rbs, large data/index tablespaces) on rawio over LVM over RAID10. The performance seems adequate; unfortunately due to the differing workloads I do not have exact numbers on 2.2.x vs 2.4.16. I haven't tried 2.2.x on this server yet due to boot problems. I originally thought it a kernel issue, but it turns out that the "2.2.x problem" was Oracle bogosity: Oracle was creating core dump directories 50000+ levels deep upon startup, running the machine out of VM/file descriptors in the process (indicated by e.g. "/bin/ls: permission denied" messages even when logged in as root), from which 2.2.20suse could not recover (2.4.16 handled it adequately). So I guess I should try 2.2.x for comparison and report the results, although I am rather reluctant to reboot a production box now that we've got a stable 2.4.x. What is your workload like? It seems that with RAID5 you might be doing mostly read-only transactions? Our workload is mostly data warehousing, with the (large) difference that we do bulk updates (in the millions of rows) on previously loaded data. I am curious if the slowdowns we have experienced only affect massively write-bound Oracle instances. Also, are the number of RAID arrays and the tablespace layout the same across the two boxes? Regards, Brian Strand CTO Switch Management - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/