Re: High "global cache blocks lost" statistics on one RAC node
- From: K Gopalakrishnan <kaygopal@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 13:23:43 -0500
Amir:
That is where we use various techniques like IP MultiPathing or NIC
teaming etc. Basically we club bunch of network cards to a single
logical one and the load balancing is done at card level which is
transparent to TCP/UDP layer.
Regards,
Gopal
On 9/8/05, Hameed, Amir <Amir.Hameed@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I guess I just can't let go of this topic. When using LLT, the LMX
> module takes care of the load-balancing of packets across the available
> interconnects. How is it done in UDP and how does UDP recognized
> multiple interconnects. Would I need to use the "cluster_interconects"
> parameter with UDP? If yes then I believe it has its own problems in
> Solaris as stated by Oracle:
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> Note:
> When you set CLUSTER_INTERCONNECTS in Solaris configurations, the
> interconnect High Availability features are not available. In other
> words, an interconnect failure that is normally unnoticeable would
> instead cause an Oracle cluster failure.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>
> Thanks
> Amir
> -----Original Message-----
> From: racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Ravi_Kulkarni@xxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 1:11 PM
> To: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: High "global cache blocks lost" statistics on one RAC node
>
> Following doc, a little-dated, covers for all Unix Flavors and should
> have what you are looking for
>
>
> Doc ID: Note:181489.1
> Subject: Tuning Inter-Instance Performance in RAC and OPS
> Type: BULLETIN
> Status: PUBLISHED
> Content Type: TEXT/X-HTML
> Creation Date: 25-MAR-2002
> Last Revision Date: 18-JAN-2004
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ravi.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Hameed, Amir
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 10:56 AM
> To: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: High "global cache blocks lost" statistics on one RAC node
>
> Thank you KG.
> This is really useful information. It will help me save time by not
> trying to spend time to resolve something that is not stable.
> Thanks for everyone's input and comments on this subject. I will change
> the protocol from LLT to UDP and then run the same test again and see if
> the stats of lost blocks changes.
> Does anyone have any guidelines on what to tune in UDP?
>
> Thanks
> Amir
> -----Original Message-----
> From: racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of K Gopalakrishnan
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 11:46 AM
> To: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: High "global cache blocks lost" statistics on one RAC node
>
> Amir:
>
> Not just Raj, Most of my customers (all are biggest banks/telcos) run
> their critical apps on UDP. Few guys tried Veritas LLT, Sun RSM and
> miserably failed. Anand was also part of that experiment. Sun RSM is
> totally unstable and we could't find a single reference customer from
> Sun who is on production with RSM on 15K.
>
> About LLT, one of the largest bank in India (they are the biggest OLTP
> database in the world) tried thier best and now they have gone back to
> UDP. I also have similar experience with HMP on Hyperfabric on one of
> the benchmarks and finally we have gone back to UDP.
>
> KG
>
> On 9/8/05, Hameed, Amir <Amir.Hameed@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It is good to know that there are folks who are running their mission
> > critical apps on UDP.
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:racdba-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On
> > Behalf Of rjamya
> > Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 7:12 AM
> > To: racdba@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: High "global cache blocks lost" statistics on one RAC
> node
> >
> >
> > We too run mission critical databases (where downtime costs us
> thousands)
> > and they all use UDP and have always been reliable.
> >
> > YMMV
> > Raj
> >
> > On 9/7/05, Hameed, Amir <Amir.Hameed@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This is a mission critical application and processes millions of $$
> of
> > > revenue and I am a little hesitant in going with UDP because of its
> > > not-so-reliable reputation. I may escalate this with VOS tomorrow
> and
> > > see what they have to say.
> > >
> > > Amir
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> K Gopalakrishnan
> Co-Author: Oracle Wait Interface, Oracle Press 2004
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/007222729X/
>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
K Gopalakrishnan
Co-Author: Oracle Wait Interface, Oracle Press 2004
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/007222729X/
Other related posts:
