Re: Orion... should we believe what we see?
- From: Philip Jones <phil@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "JTornblad@xxxxxxxxxx" <JTornblad@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:50:39 +0000
Hi,
You really should use SLOB instead.
See
http://kevinclosson.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/introducing-slob-the-silly-little-oracle-benchmark/
Kevin's blog should be in your list of RSS feeds if it isn't already!
Cheers,
Phil
On 25 Feb 2013, at 00:34, "Tornblad, John" <JTornblad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We are seeing wildy varying performance in an Orion run meant to simulate a
> DW workload (large sequential 1MB reads).
>
> The output below seems to be "red flags" all over:
> a) Wildly varying results, even counterintuitive results (more concurrent
> reads = less throughput)
> b) Latency on the first test (1 concurrent read at a time) showed 34 IOs at a
> 1-2 sec latency
> c) In other tests, smaller reads (128KB) seem to perform better but have only
> yielded a maximum of ~1300 MB/sec
>
> Trying to employ some "USE" (utilization/saturation/errors) methodology but
> this is time consuming. There is some skepticism of Orion's reliability in
> our shop. Problem statement: we believe this frame should be producing
> closer to 2300 MB/sec bandwidth on large sequential IOs.
>
> Any comments regarding weirdness (or normality?) of these results, steps to
> take next, observations would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Orion's documentation is a little scant and not many (any?) metalink notes
> regarding effectively using it. I've listened to Alex Gorbachev talk about
> Orion a couple of times but need more input on what to do or think when
> "things don't go right".
>
> -
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
