Re: ASSM in 10g RAC doesnt seem work that well
- From: Martic Zoran <zoran_martic@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Christo Kutrovsky <kutrovsky.oracle@xxxxxxxxx>, oracle-l <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:02:23 -0800 (PST)
Christo,
I could not reproduce the same CPU time for ASM and
non-ASM tablespaces in all mine environments.
I have only Solaris/HP-UX environments and so cannot
test Linux.
It could be OS specific of course. This is why I
mentioned many times my environment and what I tested.
I am not using any specific parameter.
Maybe tuned a little bit interconnection between nodes
in the past and that is all.
In your case you need to tune waits because that is
what is the different in your case.
Nothing to do with the CPU usage because it is the
same.
I assume your test is far from the real scenario?
Maybe you just proved when pushing with very high
speed DML from both nodes then the collisions on
blocks are more frequent and so pushing RAC to the end
where performances starting to drop because of global
cache.
This is very natural. As faster you push both sides of
RAC you are going to pay the price.
In this particular case old non-ASSM with two
freelists gave you better results.
I assume your HW/SW/interconnect environment may cause
these things. You should be aware about the RAC tuning
and global cache issues with bad interconnection.
Regards,
Zoran
--- Christo Kutrovsky <kutrovsky.oracle@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> So right now we're basically lost?
>
> - We dont know why ASSM is using less CPU in
> Martic's case and not in mine
> - We dont know why ASSM is not working as expected
> in my RAC test
> case, and not in his.
>
> Any ideas ?
>
> Martic, why dont you post all your non-default
> parameters ? Could it
> be something OS specific, i did not see any LINUX
> results or I missed
> it ?
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
