RE: dedicated server process memory usage ....
- From: "Pampati, Sree" <Sree.Pampati@xxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:43:40 -0400
Thanks Frank ,Dennis & Juan !
Why does OS allocate about 536 MB to the server process (shared though!)
? Is it something we can tune ?
Thanks,
Sree Pampati
617-392-1594
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark W. Farnham [mailto:mwf@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 10:18 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: dedicated server process memory usage ....
On systems such as yours where pmap -x exists and works
correctly, you can see beautifully on the line address 20000000 that
nearly all of the memory for this process is shared. That's your Oracle
shared memory area which you should also be able to view view ipcs. So
you see at the bottom how little private memory you are really using,
even though RSS reports it all per process. You only have an actual
problem on systems (mostly ancient, I think) that keep counting reads of
shared memory against each process and drive false paging. So I don't
think you have an operational problem, just a concern about how the
memory adds up. Correct me if I'm wrong.
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Pampati, Sree
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 9:57 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: dedicated server process memory usage ....
Thanks Mark for your reply!
I meant : I just opened sqlplus connection using
"sqlplus userid/pwd", that's all!
You said : ..." but please be sure to avoid taking the
.6G per server process allocation seriously" . I am not sure how to
tune/avoid this ?
I sincerely appreciate your thoughts on this .
pmap -x <pid> is given below:
read/write/exec/shared {ism shmid=0X201 ] figures seem
to be very big ?!!!!!!
8828: oracleqalc4
(DESCRIPTION=(LOCAL=YES)(ADDRESS=(PROTOCOL=beq)))
Address Kbytes Resident Shared Private Permissions
Mapped File
00010000 48272 25952 25952 - read/exec
oracle
02F42000 472 472 368 104 read/write/exec
oracle
02FB8000 432 320 - 320 read/write/exec
[ heap ]
20000000 536576 536576 536576 -
read/write/exec/shared [ ism shmid=0x201 ]
FEBC0000 16 16 16 - read/exec
libc_psr.so.1
FEBD0000 88 80 80 - read/exec
libm.so.1
FEBF4000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libm.so.1
FEC00000 4400 2880 2880 - read/exec
libjox9.so
FF05A000 192 192 32 160 read/write/exec
libjox9.so
FF08A000 8 - - - read/write/exec
libjox9.so
FF0A0000 16 16 16 - read/exec
libmp.so.2
FF0B4000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libmp.so.2
FF0C0000 8 8 8 - read/exec
libkstat.so.1
FF0D2000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libkstat.so.1
FF0E0000 32 32 32 - read/exec
libaio.so.1
FF0F8000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libaio.so.1
FF100000 688 688 688 - read/exec
libc.so.1
FF1BC000 32 32 - 32 read/write/exec
libc.so.1
FF1D0000 24 24 24 - read/exec
librt.so.1
FF1E6000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
librt.so.1
FF1F0000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
[ anon ]
FF200000 568 568 568 - read/exec
libnsl.so.1
FF29E000 40 40 - 40 read/write/exec
libnsl.so.1
FF2A8000 24 16 - 16 read/write/exec
libnsl.so.1
FF2C0000 8 8 8 - read/exec
libsched.so.1
FF2D2000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libsched.so.1
FF2E0000 8 8 8 -
read/write/exec/shared [ anon ]
FF2F0000 24 24 24 - read/exec
libgen.so.1
FF306000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libgen.so.1
FF310000 40 40 40 - read/exec
libsocket.so.1
FF32A000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libsocket.so.1
FF330000 8 8 8 - read/exec
libskgxn9.so
FF340000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libskgxn9.so
FF350000 8 8 8 - read/exec
libskgxp9.so
FF360000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libskgxp9.so
FF370000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
[ anon ]
FF380000 8 8 8 - read/exec
libodmd9.so
FF390000 8 8 - 8 read/write/exec
libodmd9.so
FF3A0000 8 8 8 - read/exec
libdl.so.1
FF3B0000 160 160 160 - read/exec
ld.so.1
FF3E6000 16 16 - 16 read/write/exec
ld.so.1
FFBE6000 40 40 - 40 read/write
[ stack ]
-------- ------ ------ ------ ------
total Kb 592320 568344 567512 832
febiccp@eceisdblc4 - qalc4
Thanks,
Sree Pampati
617-392-1594
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark W. Farnham [mailto:mwf@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 10:34 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: dedicated server process memory
usage ....
Unfortunately it is non-trivial to figure out
how much of the shared memory area of the running Oracle instance is
reported as part of each server connection, and this varies by OS,
release of OS, and tool used to report "sz" and "RSS."
I'm not sure what you meant about "no SQL fired"
since I'm not aware of how to open a sqlplus connection without the
query of username/password firing, along with whatever level of auditing
you may have.
Possibly someone else can refer you to a good
resource for evaluating MTS, but please be sure to avoid taking the .6G
per server process allocation seriously. I doubt Solaris 8 has this
problem, but some old Unix varieties had page/swap limits that did not
take into account shared memory, so executing a table scan would drive
"false paging" unless you configured "RSSMAX" to the ceiling of your
shared memory plus the program space. By "false paging" I mean copying
shared memory your process has mapped to page or swap (from whence it
will never be recalled, since the shared memory is still actually
current.) Setting the RSSMAX high would in turn then allow applications
to run rampant on your memory, so this tipped the balance of whether to
allow a certain application on your database server far in favor of
saying no if an application had big libraries.
Good luck!
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Pampati, Sree
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 9:42 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: dedicated server process memory
usage ....
Hi,
How is memory allocated to a dedicated
server process ? I just opened a sqlplus connection ( no SQL fired!),
did ps -elf | grep <pid> on the server pid, which showed sz: 592M,
RSS: 558. There are about 800 server processes running at that time
( the box has 10G physical mem, of which about 2GB was free at that
time. Solaris 8 . Oracle version :9.2.0.4 ).
*_area_size parameters in init.ora are
: bitmap_merge_area_size = 1048576 (1MB)
create_bitmap_area_size= 8388608 (8MB)
hash_area_size = 4194304 (4MB)
sort_area_size = 2097152 (2MB)
Oracle 10gAS and 9iAS too are running on
the box in addition to the oracle instance.
Is this a good candidate for MTS ? Do
I get substantial benefit using pga_target_aggregate features of 9i ?
I would very sincerely appreciate your
valuable feed back ( any pointers to docs/info are highly appreciated).
Thanks,
Sree Pampati
-----Original Message-----
From: Darrell Landrum
[mailto:darrell@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 12:58 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Hardware Question
Hey Jay,
I hate when management comes to me with
questions like you mention about this new hardware handling the
workload.
But, I have a response now that I love
because it can be confusing to them.
I simply ask, "Why?".
Why are they looking at new hardware?
Does the current hardware not handle the workload? Is there a
forthcoming app server/database upgrade that will require more
resources? Are they scaling out their current utilization, perhaps to
more users? Are they adding more databases? I know this may not seem
like the best attitude and trust me, I love newer, faster hardware more
than most, but really the justification for new hardware should come
before the shopping for hardware. In my role as a DBA, I should be the
one (or, of course, the sys admins) that recognizes the need for
hardware upgrades and hopefully before management starts to feel the
need. If I can't quantify the need for new servers or additional
hardware (or software for that matter), I actually speak against it.
This way, when I tell them we need something, they listen!
Just one guy's 2 cents.
However, you mention a bottleneck on the
SAN controllers. That is a big red flag. There's always a chance (and
some would argue a very good chance) that faster processors and more
memory will make this SAN controller bottleneck worse or at least more
noticeable. Hopefully, additional channels to the SAN are being
considered with this new box as well.
Good luck!
Other related posts:
