Hi All, we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. ocfs version being used is $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 Database Version is 9.2.0.5 However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. However even with one node the performance is real bad. Any pointers on how to debug this problem. R'gds Varghese Abraham.
yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which is not cached in the OS only in oracle. this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will see the difference again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions Wim On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> > Hi All, > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > ocfs version being used is > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > R'gds > Varghese Abraham. > _______________________________________________ > Ocfs-users mailing list > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
Hi Wim, I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. Neither am I blaming OCFS. After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. R'gds Varghese Abraham. -----Original Message----- From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which is not cached in the OS only in oracle. this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will see the difference again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions Wim On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> > Hi All, > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > ocfs version being used is > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > R'gds > Varghese Abraham. > _______________________________________________ > Ocfs-users mailing list > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
I confirmed with our sysadmin and we are not using securepath. " When we first noticed the slow performance , I remembered the securepath issue which was posted on this forum and we confirmed from our SYSADMINs that we are not using Securepatch. " -----Original Message----- From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow are you using securepath ? On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> > Hi Wim, > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. > > R'gds > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > see the difference > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > Wim > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > ocfs version being used is > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > R'gds > > Varghese Abraham. > > _______________________________________________ > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users >
OLD System Database Node DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 2 CPU EACH NODE , 6 GB RAM ) Storage Space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage Raid 0+1 Configuration ) Database Version -- 9.2.0.3 OCFS -- 1.0.9 ( For some time we were on 1.0.8 and this too was good performance) Kernel -- e27 There were five ocfs volumes New System DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 4 cpu , 6 gb ram ) Storage space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage , Raid 0+1 Configuration)\ Database -- 9.2.0.5 OCFS -- 1.0.12 ( we were initially on 1.0.11 and this too was slow ) Kernel -- e38 There are 7 ocfs volumes I am not sure of the drivers but they would be difintely of a later version than the old system R'gds Abraham. -----Original Message----- From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:55 AM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow hmm well - not sure. what changed can you give a description of the system old and new what hardare, how many disks, which controllers, which drivers, how many ports how many filesystems mounted etc ? On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:47:15AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> I confirmed with our sysadmin and we are not using securepath. > > " > When we first noticed the slow performance , I remembered the securepath issue which was posted on this forum > and we confirmed from our SYSADMINs that we are not using Securepatch. " > > > -----Original Message----- > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > are you using securepath ? > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > Hi Wim, > > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. > > > > R'gds > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > > see the difference > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > > > Wim > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > >
[root@usingorcdb04 root]# modinfo -n qla2300 /lib/modules/2.4.9-e.38enterprise/kernel/drivers/addon/qla2xxx/qla2300.o [root@usingorcdb04 root]# R'gds Varghese Abraham. -----Original Message----- From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:25 AM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow there have been no changes in 1.0.9 -> 1.0.12 that affect performance, we would ve seen that for sure. I wonder if its the qla driver or so. can yo do a modinfo -n on the driver ? eg modinfo -n qla2300 or whatever the name is ? On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 11:09:41AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> OLD System > > Database Node > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 2 CPU EACH NODE , 6 GB RAM ) > Storage Space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage Raid 0+1 Configuration ) > > Database Version -- 9.2.0.3 > OCFS -- 1.0.9 ( For some time we were on 1.0.8 and this too was good performance) > Kernel -- e27 > > There were five ocfs volumes > > > New System > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 4 cpu , 6 gb ram ) > Storage space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage , Raid 0+1 Configuration)\ > > Database -- 9.2.0.5 > OCFS -- 1.0.12 ( we were initially on 1.0.11 and this too was slow ) > Kernel -- e38 > There are 7 ocfs volumes > I am not sure of the drivers but they would be difintely of a later version than the old system > > R'gds > Abraham. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:55 AM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > hmm well - not sure. what changed > can you give a description of the system old and new > what hardare, how many disks, which controllers, which drivers, how many > ports how many filesystems mounted etc ? > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:47:15AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > I confirmed with our sysadmin and we are not using securepath. > > > > " > > When we first noticed the slow performance , I remembered the securepath issue which was posted on this forum > > and we confirmed from our SYSADMINs that we are not using Securepatch. " > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > are you using securepath ? > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > > > > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. > > > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. > > > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. > > > > > > R'gds > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > > > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > > > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > > > see the difference > > > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > > > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > > > > > Wim > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > > > > > > >
Is this the driver we should be using. ( Our sysadmin is trying to get the same) Did the vmstat give any idea on any issues. -----Original Message----- From: Sunil Mushran [mailto:Sunil.Mushran@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:31 PM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: RE: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow Have you tried using the redhat version of the same: ./kernel/drivers/addon/qla2200_531RH1/qla2300_531RH1.o On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 11:38, Varghese Abraham wrote:> [root@usingorcdb04 root]# modinfo -n qla2300 > /lib/modules/2.4.9-e.38enterprise/kernel/drivers/addon/qla2xxx/qla2300.o > [root@usingorcdb04 root]# > > > R'gds > Varghese Abraham. > > -----Original Message----- > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:25 AM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > there have been no changes in 1.0.9 -> 1.0.12 that affect performance, > we would ve seen that for sure. I wonder if its the qla driver or so. > can yo do a modinfo -n on the driver ? eg modinfo -n qla2300 or > whatever the name is ? > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 11:09:41AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > OLD System > > > > Database Node > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 2 CPU EACH NODE , 6 GB RAM ) > > Storage Space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage Raid 0+1 Configuration ) > > > > Database Version -- 9.2.0.3 > > OCFS -- 1.0.9 ( For some time we were on 1.0.8 and this too was good performance) > > Kernel -- e27 > > > > There were five ocfs volumes > > > > > > New System > > > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 4 cpu , 6 gb ram ) > > Storage space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage , Raid 0+1 Configuration)\ > > > > Database -- 9.2.0.5 > > OCFS -- 1.0.12 ( we were initially on 1.0.11 and this too was slow ) > > Kernel -- e38 > > There are 7 ocfs volumes > > I am not sure of the drivers but they would be difintely of a later version than the old system > > > > R'gds > > Abraham. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:55 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > hmm well - not sure. what changed > > can you give a description of the system old and new > > what hardare, how many disks, which controllers, which drivers, how many > > ports how many filesystems mounted etc ? > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:47:15AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > I confirmed with our sysadmin and we are not using securepath. > > > > > > " > > > When we first noticed the slow performance , I remembered the securepath issue which was posted on this forum > > > and we confirmed from our SYSADMINs that we are not using Securepatch. " > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > are you using securepath ? > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > > > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > > > > > > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > > > > > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. > > > > > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. > > > > > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > > > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > > > > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > > > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > > > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > > > > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > > > > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > > > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > > > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > > > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > > > > see the difference > > > > > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > > > > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > > > > > > > Wim > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > > > > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > > > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ocfs-users mailing list > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
Hi we upgraded the drivers to the one mentioned by Sunil. It has not yieled in anything. Our sysadmin also tried with the latest qla driver This too has not provided any benefit. -----Original Message----- From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:47 PM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: Sunil Mushran; Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow vmstat looks clean I don't see any specific problems On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 02:44:45PM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> Is this the driver we should be using. ( Our sysadmin is trying to get the same) > Did the vmstat give any idea on any issues. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sunil Mushran [mailto:Sunil.Mushran@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:31 PM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: RE: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > Have you tried using the redhat version of the same: > > ./kernel/drivers/addon/qla2200_531RH1/qla2300_531RH1.o > > On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 11:38, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > [root@usingorcdb04 root]# modinfo -n qla2300 > > /lib/modules/2.4.9-e.38enterprise/kernel/drivers/addon/qla2xxx/qla2300.o > > [root@usingorcdb04 root]# > > > > > > R'gds > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:25 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > there have been no changes in 1.0.9 -> 1.0.12 that affect performance, > > we would ve seen that for sure. I wonder if its the qla driver or so. > > can yo do a modinfo -n on the driver ? eg modinfo -n qla2300 or > > whatever the name is ? > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 11:09:41AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > OLD System > > > > > > Database Node > > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 2 CPU EACH NODE , 6 GB RAM ) > > > Storage Space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage Raid 0+1 Configuration ) > > > > > > Database Version -- 9.2.0.3 > > > OCFS -- 1.0.9 ( For some time we were on 1.0.8 and this too was good performance) > > > Kernel -- e27 > > > > > > There were five ocfs volumes > > > > > > > > > New System > > > > > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 4 cpu , 6 gb ram ) > > > Storage space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage , Raid 0+1 Configuration)\ > > > > > > Database -- 9.2.0.5 > > > OCFS -- 1.0.12 ( we were initially on 1.0.11 and this too was slow ) > > > Kernel -- e38 > > > There are 7 ocfs volumes > > > I am not sure of the drivers but they would be difintely of a later version than the old system > > > > > > R'gds > > > Abraham. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:55 AM > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > hmm well - not sure. what changed > > > can you give a description of the system old and new > > > what hardare, how many disks, which controllers, which drivers, how many > > > ports how many filesystems mounted etc ? > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:47:15AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > I confirmed with our sysadmin and we are not using securepath. > > > > > > > > " > > > > When we first noticed the slow performance , I remembered the securepath issue which was posted on this forum > > > > and we confirmed from our SYSADMINs that we are not using Securepatch. " > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM > > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > > > > are you using securepath ? > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > > > > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > > > > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > > > > > > > > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > > > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. > > > > > > > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > > > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > > > > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > > > > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > > > > > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > > > > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > > > > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > > > > > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > > > > > > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > > > > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > > > > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > > > > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > > > > > see the difference > > > > > > > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > > > > > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > > > > > > > > > Wim > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > > > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > > > > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > >
We are using 1000 Mbps full-duplex for Interconnect. Does this matter ? I am not sure of the BIOS Version. However our sysadmin told us that there is a new firmware available which mentions a speed performance also as a bug fix. R'gds Varghese Abraham. -----Original Message----- From: Raj [mailto:sanstorage@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 3:03 PM To: Varghese Abraham; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow This might not matter. What are you using for your private interconnects? Are you using a GigE switch? Is the BIOS version of the DL 580 server the same as before? Raj On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:44:45 -0700, Varghese Abraham <varghesea@herbalife.com> wrote:> Is this the driver we should be using. ( Our sysadmin is trying to get the same) > Did the vmstat give any idea on any issues. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sunil Mushran [mailto:Sunil.Mushran@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:31 PM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: RE: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > Have you tried using the redhat version of the same: > > ./kernel/drivers/addon/qla2200_531RH1/qla2300_531RH1.o > > On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 11:38, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > [root@usingorcdb04 root]# modinfo -n qla2300 > > /lib/modules/2.4.9-e.38enterprise/kernel/drivers/addon/qla2xxx/qla2300.o > > [root@usingorcdb04 root]# > > > > > > R'gds > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:25 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > there have been no changes in 1.0.9 -> 1.0.12 that affect performance, > > we would ve seen that for sure. I wonder if its the qla driver or so. > > can yo do a modinfo -n on the driver ? eg modinfo -n qla2300 or > > whatever the name is ? > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 11:09:41AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > OLD System > > > > > > Database Node > > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 2 CPU EACH NODE , 6 GB RAM ) > > > Storage Space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage Raid 0+1 Configuration ) > > > > > > Database Version -- 9.2.0.3 > > > OCFS -- 1.0.9 ( For some time we were on 1.0.8 and this too was good performance) > > > Kernel -- e27 > > > > > > There were five ocfs volumes > > > > > > > > > New System > > > > > > DL 580 * 2 nodes ( 4 cpu , 6 gb ram ) > > > Storage space : 1.5 TB ( MSA 1000 Storage , Raid 0+1 Configuration)\ > > > > > > Database -- 9.2.0.5 > > > OCFS -- 1.0.12 ( we were initially on 1.0.11 and this too was slow ) > > > Kernel -- e38 > > > There are 7 ocfs volumes > > > I am not sure of the drivers but they would be difintely of a later version than the old system > > > > > > R'gds > > > Abraham. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:55 AM > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > hmm well - not sure. what changed > > > can you give a description of the system old and new > > > what hardare, how many disks, which controllers, which drivers, how many > > > ports how many filesystems mounted etc ? > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:47:15AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > I confirmed with our sysadmin and we are not using securepath. > > > > > > > > " > > > > When we first noticed the slow performance , I remembered the securepath issue which was posted on this forum > > > > and we confirmed from our SYSADMINs that we are not using Securepatch. " > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM > > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > > Cc: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > > > > are you using securepath ? > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > > > > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list very closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > > > > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > > > > > > > > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > > > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1) performance. > > > > > > > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > > > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to make out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in trying to debug. > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > > > > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > > > > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > > > > > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > > > > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > > > > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > > > > > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > > > > > > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > > > > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > > > > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > > > > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > > > > > see the difference > > > > > > > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > > > > > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > > > > > > > > > Wim > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > > > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete. > > > > > > > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodes enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > > > > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > _______________________________________________ > Ocfs-users mailing list > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users >
Hi Wim... This discussion is quite interesting, I am having some performance issue, but till now still under observation, This is my environment details : 1. We are using RHAS 2.1 with kernel 2.4.9-e.27 Enterprise 2. OCFS version : 2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.9-6 3. Oracle RDBMS : 9.2.0.4 RAC with 5 Nodes 4. Storage = EVA 6000 with 8 TB SIZE 5. We have 1 DiskGroup and 51 LUNs configured in EVA6000. You are talking about securepath, we are using securepath right now, is there any consideration or suggestion if we are using securepath ? I have tried to upgrade to OCFS 1.0.12, but i dont see any performance improvement. Thanks Jeram -----Original Message----- From: Wim Coekaerts [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 12:42 AM To: Varghese Abraham Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow are you using securepath ? On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote:> > Hi Wim, > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing list veryclosely for the last 3-4 months.> > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database).> On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST 1)performance.> > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable to makeout what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest for everything with the new system.> > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help intrying to debug.> > R'gds > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > see the difference > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > Wim > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > ocfs version being used is > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is tooslow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while to complete.> > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with both nodesenabled we had terrible performance)> > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > R'gds > > Varghese Abraham. > > _______________________________________________ > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users >_______________________________________________ Ocfs-users mailing list Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
Hi Wim... I have monitor by using VMSTAT, and iowaits is giving 3 digits, i think it's quite high. I have tried to reduce to 13 LUNS in my TEST environment with the same HW configuration as PROD environment, but not giving big changes. Now is there any other way to avoid using SECUREPATH? Rgds/Jeram -----Original Message----- From: Wim Coekaerts [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:24 AM To: Jeram Cc: Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow i thik the luns can become a bottleneck for one. i'd also try to not use securepath for 1 time and see how that changes performance and then go back if it's the same etc people should run vmstat for a while without anything running , just have the filesystems monted and see waht the amount of iowait on the box is On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 08:12:43AM +0700, Jeram wrote:> Hi Wim... > > This discussion is quite interesting, I am having some performance issue, > but till now still under observation, This is my environment details : > 1. We are using RHAS 2.1 with kernel 2.4.9-e.27 Enterprise > 2. OCFS version : 2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.9-6 > 3. Oracle RDBMS : 9.2.0.4 RAC with 5 Nodes > 4. Storage = EVA 6000 with 8 TB SIZE > 5. We have 1 DiskGroup and 51 LUNs configured in EVA6000. > > You are talking about securepath, we are using securepath right now, is > there any consideration or suggestion if we are using securepath ? I have > tried to upgrade to OCFS 1.0.12, but i dont see any performanceimprovement.> > Thanks > Jeram > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coekaerts [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 12:42 AM > To: Varghese Abraham > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > are you using securepath ? > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > Hi Wim, > > I appreciate your reply and I have been following this mailing listvery> closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 and ocfs. > > > > The current installation that we are having is dead slow.. > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with OCFS ( kernel e27 ,ocfs> 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance was beautiful. > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the previous systems ( TEST1)> performance. > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 system, I am unable tomake> out what has gone wrong with the new system although we are on the latest > for everything with the new system. > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is what I need your help in > trying to debug. > > > > R'gds > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem versus raw or cfs which > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list every few weeks or months > > and basically happens because there is a huge misunderstanding on what > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc etc, it takes time to > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could you go through the > > archives and look for earlier discussions on this ? > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is having a database run that > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on local fielsystem and then > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to go to disk, the rigth > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory to oracle. then you will > > see the difference > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, just do the right thing. > > and look in archives for a pointer to the discussions > > > > Wim > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along with MSA 1000. > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the database on OCFS is too > slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes like a while tocomplete.> > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. ( Because with bothnodes> enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to test out the performance. > > > However even with one node the performance is real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ocfs-users mailing list > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
Hi david, What software or tools are you using to represent the SECUREPATH? Rgds/Jeram -----Original Message----- From: David McWhinnie [mailto:davidmcwhinnie@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:33 AM To: Wim Coekaerts; Jeram Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow After doing some extensive testing with and without secure path I would recommend testing without it. We are seeing some issues with SecurePath enabled in our environment, but HP is not able to duplicate it in their labs. David. --- Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@oracle.com> wrote:> i thik the luns can become a bottleneck for one. > i'd also try to not use securepath for 1 time and > see how that changes > performance and then go back if it's the same etc > > people should run vmstat for a while without > anything running , just > have the filesystems monted and see waht the amount > of iowait on the box > is > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 08:12:43AM +0700, Jeram > wrote: > > Hi Wim... > > > > This discussion is quite interesting, I am having > some performance issue, > > but till now still under observation, This is my > environment details : > > 1. We are using RHAS 2.1 with kernel 2.4.9-e.27 > Enterprise > > 2. OCFS version : 2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.9-6 > > 3. Oracle RDBMS : 9.2.0.4 RAC with 5 Nodes > > 4. Storage = EVA 6000 with 8 TB SIZE > > 5. We have 1 DiskGroup and 51 LUNs configured in > EVA6000. > > > > You are talking about securepath, we are using > securepath right now, is > > there any consideration or suggestion if we are > using securepath ? I have > > tried to upgrade to OCFS 1.0.12, but i dont see > any performance improvement. > > > > Thanks > > Jeram > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wim Coekaerts > [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 12:42 AM > > To: Varghese Abraham > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > are you using securepath ? > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, Varghese > Abraham wrote: > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > > I appreciate your reply and I have been > following this mailing list very > > closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 > and ocfs. > > > > > > The current installation that we are having is > dead slow.. > > > > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) with > OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs > > 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance > was beautiful. > > > > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the > previous systems ( TEST 1) > > performance. > > > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 > system, I am unable to make > > out what has gone wrong with the new system > although we are on the latest > > for everything with the new system. > > > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is > what I need your help in > > trying to debug. > > > > > > R'gds > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com > [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local filesystem > versus raw or cfs which > > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list > every few weeks or months > > > and basically happens because there is a huge > misunderstanding on what > > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node etc > etc, it takes time to > > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could > you go through the > > > archives and look for earlier discussions on > this ? > > > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is > having a database run that > > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on > local fielsystem and then > > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to > go to disk, the rigth > > > thing to do (should do) is give all that memory > to oracle. then you will > > > see the difference > > > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, > just do the right thing. > > > and look in archives for a pointer to the > discussions > > > > > > Wim > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, > Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along > with MSA 1000. > > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the > database on OCFS is too > > slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables takes > like a while to complete. > > > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem area. > ( Because with both nodes > > enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to > test out the performance. > > > > However even with one node the performance is > real bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any pointers on how to debug this problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ocfs-users mailing list > > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users > > _______________________________________________ > Ocfs-users mailing list > Ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users >__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Vote for the stars of Yahoo!'s next ad campaign! http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/yahoo/votelifeengine/
Hi David... Let me try as per your suggestion. Thanks a lot for your inputs. Rgds/Jeram -----Original Message----- From: David McWhinnie [mailto:davidmcwhinnie@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:03 AM To: Jeram; Wim Coekaerts Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com Subject: RE: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow Until we can get a fix for SecurePath we are not using anything for path failover. Our only real point of failure is the switch, and we felt that the risk was acceptable. For an HBA or cable failure the RAC architecture allows things to continue running on the other nodes. --- Jeram <jeram@JISEDU.OR.ID> wrote:> Hi david, > > What software or tools are you using to represent > the SECUREPATH? > > Rgds/Jeram > > -----Original Message----- > From: David McWhinnie > [mailto:davidmcwhinnie@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:33 AM > To: Wim Coekaerts; Jeram > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > After doing some extensive testing with and without > secure path I would recommend testing without it. > We > are seeing some issues with SecurePath enabled in > our > environment, but HP is not able to duplicate it in > their labs. > > > David. > > --- Wim Coekaerts <wim.coekaerts@oracle.com> wrote: > > i thik the luns can become a bottleneck for one. > > i'd also try to not use securepath for 1 time and > > see how that changes > > performance and then go back if it's the same etc > > > > people should run vmstat for a while without > > anything running , just > > have the filesystems monted and see waht the > amount > > of iowait on the box > > is > > > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 08:12:43AM +0700, Jeram > > wrote: > > > Hi Wim... > > > > > > This discussion is quite interesting, I am > having > > some performance issue, > > > but till now still under observation, This is my > > environment details : > > > 1. We are using RHAS 2.1 with kernel 2.4.9-e.27 > > Enterprise > > > 2. OCFS version : 2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.9-6 > > > 3. Oracle RDBMS : 9.2.0.4 RAC with 5 Nodes > > > 4. Storage = EVA 6000 with 8 TB SIZE > > > 5. We have 1 DiskGroup and 51 LUNs configured in > > EVA6000. > > > > > > You are talking about securepath, we are using > > securepath right now, is > > > there any consideration or suggestion if we are > > using securepath ? I have > > > tried to upgrade to OCFS 1.0.12, but i dont see > > any performance improvement. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Jeram > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Wim Coekaerts > > [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 12:42 AM > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow > > > > > > > > > are you using securepath ? > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 10:29:47AM -0700, > Varghese > > Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > > > I appreciate your reply and I have been > > following this mailing list very > > > closely for the last 3-4 months. > > > > > > > > I am not at all trying to compare between ext3 > > and ocfs. > > > > > > > > The current installation that we are having is > > dead slow.. > > > > > > > > > > > > We had a previous rac installation (TEST1 ) > with > > OCFS ( kernel e27 , ocfs > > > 1.0.9 , 9.2.0.3 database). > > > > On this old system with OCFS, our performance > > was beautiful. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not able to get even a foot close to the > > previous systems ( TEST 1) > > > performance. > > > > > > > > Neither am I blaming OCFS. > > > > After having seen good performance with TEST1 > > system, I am unable to make > > > out what has gone wrong with the new system > > although we are on the latest > > > for everything with the new system. > > > > > > > > I am sure it is some small issue and that is > > what I need your help in > > > trying to debug. > > > > > > > > R'gds > > > > Varghese Abraham. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: wim.coekaerts@oracle.com > > [mailto:wim.coekaerts@oracle.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM > > > > To: Varghese Abraham > > > > Cc: ocfs-users@oss.oracle.com > > > > Subject: Re: [Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too > slow > > > > > > > > > > > > yes you are probably comparing local > filesystem > > versus raw or cfs which > > > > is not cached in the OS only in oracle. > > > > > > > > this is a story that comes back on this list > > every few weeks or months > > > > and basically happens because there is a huge > > misunderstanding on what > > > > the OS filesystem cache provides single node > etc > > etc, it takes time to > > > > explain and I think wehave in the past. could > > you go through the > > > > archives and look for earlier discussions on > > this ? > > > > > > > > there is nothing slow, what youa re doing is > > having a database run that > > > > has a lot of stuff cached in the OS itself on > > local fielsystem and then > > > > when you do that query on cfs or raw it has to > > go to disk, the rigth > > > > thing to do (should do) is give all that > memory > > to oracle. then you will > > > > see the difference > > > > > > > > again, it's not abug, don't think it's slow, > > just do the right thing. > > > > and look in archives for a pointer to the > > discussions > > > > > > > > Wim > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:39:33AM -0700, > > Varghese Abraham wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > we are using Red Hat 2.1 Kernel e38 along > > with MSA 1000. > > > > > ocfs version being used is > > > > > > > > > > $ rpm -qa | grep ocfs > > > > > ocfs-tools-1.0.10-1 > > > > > ocfs-2.4.9-e-enterprise-1.0.12-1 > > > > > ocfs-support-1.0.10-1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Database Version is 9.2.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However we find that the performance of the > > database on OCFS is too > > > slow. even a select count(1) from all_tables > takes > > like a while to complete. > > > > > > > > > > We initially assumed RAC is the problem > area. > > ( Because with both nodes > > > enabled we had terrible performance) > > > > > > > > > > Hence we stopped one of the RAC Databases to > > test out the performance. > > > > > However even with one node the performance > is > > real bad. >=== message truncated == __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail