[Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow

Fri Jul 16 12:24:30 CDT 2004

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 at oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts at oracle.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:55 AM
> To: Varghese Abraham
> Cc: wim.coekaerts at oracle.com; ocfs-users at 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 at oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:42 AM
> > To: Varghese Abraham
> > Cc: wim.coekaerts at oracle.com; ocfs-users at 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 at oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts at oracle.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 10:13 AM
> > > To: Varghese Abraham
> > > Cc: ocfs-users at 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 at oss.oracle.com
> > > > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 