We were facing similar issues on the VMs of vmware during performance testing of Oracle on Windows. After moving to the Physical machines, there is 10-15% improvement. Additional virtual layer decreases performance as it leads to additional processing layer . In my opinion, VM are good for test and development environments and not suitable for Production systems where every millisecond counts Thanks, Harman On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Ls Cheng <exriscer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi > > Is it RAC? If it is but your load is not high enough you probably wont hit > the problem. In our case we had large load (112 CPU with 60 to 70 runquue) > and under that workload we hit a Solaris 11 bug where all RAC RT process > contend CPU in a single RT runqueue and literally kills the performance but > even with the fix the performance improvement is only roughly 10% over > M9000. Compared with other processors such as Intel or IBM Power T5 is not > as fast as it seems. > > Thanks > > > > On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Philippe Fierens < > philippe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> We did a migration from M9000 to 2 T5-2 and no issues with performance on >> the io domain, when using service domains it depends, small random io >> clearly to a hit, big sequential io was ok ... >> >> I will blog about it shortly... >> >> >> Philippe Fierens >> philippe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> >> pfierens.blogspot.com >> >> >> On 05 Dec 2013, at 14:19, Ls Cheng <exriscer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > Hi all >> > >> > Has anyone migrated to Oracle Sparc T5 and running in LDOM (Oracle VM >> for Sparc) and noticed any performance problems? >> > >> > We have migrated a few database from Sun Sparc M9000 to the new T5's >> and the performance is worse, for example running 60000 times select 1 from >> dual using a for loop takes 3 to 5 seconds in T5 where as in M9000 it took >> 2.5 seconds, same test running in several Intel and IBM P6 and P7 all get >> better results (from 1.3 seconds to 2.7 seconds). >> > >> > The test is a bit vague but look like it shows the performance >> difference >> > >> > >> > Thanks >> > >> > >> >> >