[Ocfs-users] OCFS Database too slow
Varghese Abraham
VargheseA at herbalife.com
Fri Jul 16 20:18:03 CDT 2004
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 at oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts at oracle.com]
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:47 PM
To: Varghese Abraham
Cc: Sunil Mushran; Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users at 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 at oracle.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:31 PM
> To: Varghese Abraham
> Cc: Wim Coekaerts; ocfs-users at 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 at usingorcdb04 root]# modinfo -n qla2300
> > /lib/modules/2.4.9-e.38enterprise/kernel/drivers/addon/qla2xxx/qla2300.o
> > [root at usingorcdb04 root]#
> >
> >
> > R'gds
> > Varghese Abraham.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wim.coekaerts at oracle.com [mailto:wim.coekaerts at oracle.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 11:25 AM
> > To: Varghese Abraham
> > Cc: wim.coekaerts at oracle.com; ocfs-users at 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 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ocfs-users mailing list
> > Ocfs-users at oss.oracle.com
> > http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs-users
>
>
>
More information about the Ocfs-users
mailing list