It is simplest to run a benchmark and you will see that your app will notice
a difference if you have a low latency app.
It also limits the overall amount of work that can be accomplished on that
blade.
Matthew Parker
Chief Technologist
Dimensional DBA
425-891-7934 (cell)
D&B 047931344
CAGE 7J5S7
Dimensional.dba@xxxxxxxxxxx
<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/matthew-parker/6/51b/944/> View Matthew
Parker's profile on LinkedIn
www.dimensionaldba.com <http://www.dimensionaldba.com/>
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Hameed, Amir
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 11:55 AM
To: 'ORACLE-L'
Subject: Memory speed question
We have a four-node ESX farm/cluster where each node is loaded with 512G of
physical memory. These ESX nodes are Cisco UCS blades. We are looking into
adding more memory to each of these ESX hosts to increase the footprint to
750G/node. One of the data center architects had informed us last year that
per Cisco, the sweet-spot of memory footprint on these blades is 512GB,
after that the memory access speed would drop from 1600MHZ to 1066MHZ (a
drop of ~ 30%). Because all of our VMs host application tiers and they run a
lot of JVM processes, we are concerned that a drop of 30% will negatively
impact our applications' performance. However, our data center has been
telling us that the drop will not be noticed by the application which I find
hard to believe. We also do not want to add another ESX host because of
licensing cost.
I was wondering if anyone is running their ESX hosts with memory over
512G/host and if they observed any issue with memory speed.
Thank you,
Amir
