RE: 11g AMM tmpfs vs hugepages for best overall performance

From: "Crisler, Jon" <Jon.Crisler@xxxxxxx>
To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:02:44 -0400

And a follow up question- if I implement a large /tmpfs - shm, I can
still use choose to not use AMM and use hugepages, correct ?

From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Crisler, Jon
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:57 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: 11g AMM tmpfs vs hugepages for best overall performance 

Which is better for performance on large Red Hat 5 systems (64gb+
memory, 8+ cpu's) -  using 10g style shm settings and hugepages, OR the
newer 11g Automatic Memory Manager (which does not support hugepages).

The system I am building is a 6 node 11g R1 RAC, memory somewhere
between 64gb and 256gb (not sure yet), 8 cpu per node.  This machine
will support a huge workload.

Follow-Ups:

RE: 11g AMM tmpfs vs hugepages for best overall performance
From: D'Hooge Freek

References:
- FW: Controlfile Section 28 - denied expansion of controlfile
  - From: Powell, Mark
- 11g AMM tmpfs vs hugepages for best overall performance
  - From: Crisler, Jon

RE: 11g AMM tmpfs vs hugepages for best overall performance

Other related posts: