| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: NT -> Win2K causes performance degradation..
Hi all,
Thanks for the pointers that you have all supplied. Sage advice that they shouldn't have changed Oracle whilst changing their OS at the same time.
I also did some checking up on the /3GB switch before it was mentioned
(having seen it on here in the past) - Windows 2000 does in fact support a
4gb address space, though the /3GB switch is only appropriate for Windows
2000 Advanced Server and Windows 2000 Datacenter Server - if you use it for
Microsoft Windows 2000 Server - you will lose 1gb of address space! More
info (based on Exchange though) is available here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B328882
If we ever find out what the actual cause was, I'll feed it back to the list. For now we've suggested they roll back the Oracle changes, reassess performance, and then increase their memory structures in steps - assessing performance along the way. We've also asked about the /3GB switch, and pagefile sizes - though they think that the rate of their swapping hasn't increased since the upgrade.
Thanks again!
Mark
-----Original Message-----
Yechiel Adar
Sent: 11 December 2003 14:40
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
The /3GB does not work for the simple reason that in W2K you have 3GB as max address space. At least that what my sysadmin tells me (after checking with MS).
Yechiel Adar
Mehish
----- Original Message -----
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 6:49 PM
Mark,
My guess is, that the new OS re-instated the file system caching. By default, 41% (yes, it should have been 42%) of physical memory will be allocated to filesystem caching, as W2K thinks it a fileserver (and domain controller, web server, print server, etc) until you tell it otherwise.
This is much improved in w2k3 server - where you tell it what you want it to be.
A good sysadmin would have set the OS to "optimize throughput for network applications" which would have turned off the filesystem caching. Ok, its only one radio button to select, so an MSCE could set it also.
Surprisingly enough, in W2K Server - changing this setting does not require a reboot, although I don't know if the changes take effect until after a system restart. That's not the sort of thing that I usually test, as NT4 had me trained to reboot afterwards.
the other thing may be, that the boot.ini no longer supports the /3GB or /PAE switches as Jared mentioned - but that should not cause the symptoms you are reporting.
hth.
Paul
Mark Leith <mark_at_cool-tools.co.uk> wrote: Hi All,
We've been asked a question from one of our clients that I'm a little stumped on.
They run an OLTP database (Oracle 8.1.7), and have recently upgraded their NT machine to Windows 2000, they were running with 2gb of memory, and upgraded that to 4gb in the process. As they increased physical memory, they also increased their SGA size & db_block_buffers.
Since they've upgraded they have noticed a significant decrease in performance (the way it was described to me was "it was 7 out of 10, and is now 3 out of 10"..).
Has anybody else done a system upgrade of this nature that has caused less than desirable effects? Any pointers as to what to look at? We've requested some stats (top wait stats etc.) and I'll feed these back as and when I get them - but I thought I'd throw this out to you guys in the vague hope thatsomeone has experienced some relatively similar experiences.
Cheers!
Mark
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.547 / Virus Database: 340 - Release Date: 02/12/2003 -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net -- Author: Mark Leith INET: mark_at_cool-tools.co.uk Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Ma! il message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-LReceived on Thu Dec 11 2003 - 11:59:25 CST
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.547 / Virus Database: 340 - Release Date: 02/12/2003 -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net -- Author: Mark Leith INET: mark_at_cool-tools.co.uk Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
 |
 |