SEO
vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
01-16-2008, 10:46 AM
| ||||
| ||||
 V880 problem Hi, We bought a V880 to replace our older 420R. I installed a Sybase ASE 12 database server on the new machine (I'm a Sybase DBA), and for some reason inserts into the server are running slower than the 420R. All other activities seem to run pretty fast (selects, database dumps, etc.). On the older 420R we have an A1000 in place, and on the new V880 we have 2 D2's. Could the disk array be the cause of the slowness? Anything else that you suggest checking? I've installed both Sybase versions on the machine and they both run slower than on the 420R, so I know its not a Sybase problem. I'd appreciate any help. Thanks, Yuval      |
|
01-16-2008, 10:46 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: V880 problem Yuval wrote: > > We bought a V880 to replace our older 420R. I installed a Sybase ASE > 12 database server on the new machine (I'm a Sybase DBA), and for some > reason inserts into the server are running slower than the 420R. All > other activities seem to run pretty fast (selects, database dumps, > etc.). On the older 420R we have an A1000 in place, and on the new > V880 we have 2 D2's. Could the disk array be the cause of the > slowness? Anything else that you suggest checking? Do you have it configured for RAID? If so, with what software - SDS/SVM or Vertais VM? And, more importantly, what RAID level? > I've installed both Sybase versions on the machine and they both run > slower than on the 420R, so I know its not a Sybase problem. Both versions? What's the other one? -am © 2003 |
|
01-16-2008, 10:46 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: V880 problem In article <f1efbdb3.0307230519.5dcc9580@posting.google.com >, Yuval <yuvalyuval@yahoo.com> wrote: >Hi, > >We bought a V880 to replace our older 420R. I installed a Sybase ASE >12 database server on the new machine (I'm a Sybase DBA), and for some >reason inserts into the server are running slower than the 420R. All >other activities seem to run pretty fast (selects, database dumps, >etc.). On the older 420R we have an A1000 in place, and on the new >V880 we have 2 D2's. Could the disk array be the cause of the >slowness? Anything else that you suggest checking? > >I've installed both Sybase versions on the machine and they both run >slower than on the 420R, so I know its not a Sybase problem. > >I'd appreciate any help. > You are trying to compare performance of an A1000 , which has a hw raid controller and a built in cache to a JBOD which is (presumably) using some sort of software raid and no cache and don't expect to see a difference in the performance? -Raf |
|
01-16-2008, 10:46 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: V880 problem We found out that the D2's were causing the slowness, as the database works incredibly fast on internal FCAL disks. We'll be testing with the A1000 to see if performance is up to standards. Are there big performance differences between the A1000 and the A5200? Thanks, Yuval dol@ce.chalmers.se (Fredrik Lundholm) wrote in message news:<bfm9m3$q0$1@eol.dd.chalmers.se>... > In article <f1efbdb3.0307230519.5dcc9580@posting.google.com >, > Yuval <yuvalyuval@yahoo.com> wrote: > >Hi, > > > >We bought a V880 to replace our older 420R. I installed a Sybase ASE > >12 database server on the new machine (I'm a Sybase DBA), and for some > >reason inserts into the server are running slower than the 420R. All > > >etc.). On the older 420R we have an A1000 in place, and on the new > >V880 we have 2 D2's. Could the disk array be the cause of the > >slowness? Anything else that you suggest checking? > > Yes, the A1000, while pretty slow, has a battery backed RAID-controller > which caches writes and makes occasional inserts 10x faster. > > The D2:s are expensive and close to be (or are already) discontinued. > A D2 has no RAID controller. > > A SE3310 (or better) with redundant raid controllers is what you > want to have. You can then use RAID-5 and get maximum performance. > > /wfr > Fredrik |
|
01-16-2008, 10:46 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: V880 problem Yuval wrote: > > We found out that the D2's were causing the slowness, as the database > works incredibly fast on internal FCAL disks. We'll be testing with > the A1000 to see if performance is up to standards. Are there big > performance differences between the A1000 and the A5200? The A5200 is FCAL with up to 4 loops (and uses optical cable rather than copper like the V880 does internally). It doesn't have hardware RAID nor cache though. -am © 2003 |
|
01-16-2008, 10:47 AM
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: V880 problem Yuval wrote: > I still think that inserting 100,000 rows to UFS devices in 45 second, > and inserting them to raw/striped devices in 10 minutes, indicates > something is wrong. Could be the hardware, could be a patch, etc., > but something is not right with the machine, as it takes 10 minutes > even on internal raw devices without disksuite or the D2's. On our > 420R this takes less than 3 minutes. I'm thinking something is wrong > with the hardware itself. There might just be a hardware problem. But the first thing I'd check is OS patches. Look for anything related to the I/O drivers or aio. Then check the internal wiring diagram. When you open the left side panel there is a diagram and wiring guide with part numbers. For some reason Sun won't let end users wire it up but the guy who did the first one I worked with did it wrong (he was from a reseller). He ended up with a cable left over (annoyingly, he took it with him and when I rang their help desk they wouldn't admit there was a problem or send the part back). They even told me that luxadm doesn't work with the internal disks (which is stupid because they are FC-AL). Anyway, when I ran luxadm the first 6 disks looked OK but the other 6 didn't. I posted on this once before in this newsgroup. Try a search if you wish to look up what I wrote then. -am © 2003 |
Linear Mode
