Re: Oracle8i MTS on NT - any experience?

Alex,

Thanks for this excellent input.

Best regards...Paul

Alex Filonov <afilonov_at_pro-ns.net> wrote in message news:3B4E615F.1BBC4EBB_at_pro-ns.net...
> Paul Offord wrote:
>
> > Just for background - the database server is an IBM NetFinity with 8
> > processors and 4GB of RAM. We are running the NT 4GT option to give us
 3GB
> > of application memory. At 100 users (around 250 connections) the
 processors
> > are busy but not stressed. Total memory in use by the Oracle process
 hovers
> > around the 2GB mark on PerfMon.
> >
> > Best regards...Paul
> >
> > Paul Offord <paul.offord_at_btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > news:9iifsa$4nv$1_at_plutonium.btinternet.com...
> > > I am currently helping a customer to troubleshoot some Oracle
 Financials
> > > post-installation problems. At the core of the system they have an
 Oracle8i
> > > database running on an NT4 server. Oracle financials seems to require
 2
 or
> > > sometimes 3 database connections per server. The system needs to
 support
> > > 400 users and so we are expecting 1,000 connections to the database
 server.
> > > Oracle consultants have been on site and tuned the per connection
 memory
> > > requirement down to 5 MB. However, that would still require 5GB -
 beyond
> > > the capabilities of NT.
> > >
> > > We are looking at implementing Multi-Threaded Server to bring the
 memory
> > > demands within the capabilities of the NT platform. Oracle UK's
 experience
> > > of an NT site of this size seems limited.
> > >
> > > * What experience do you have of MTS on NT?
> > >
> > > * Do you run an Oracle8i server on NT with a similar number of users?
> > >
> > > Any experiences, war stories, dos/don'ts would be much appreciated.
> > >
> > > Tnaks in advance...Paul
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> How big is your SGA right now? To use MTS, you'll have to increase SGA
> significantly, at least by 1m per user session. For 400 connected users
 you are
> going to need 400M extra in shared_pool_size. Can you do it? Max SGA
 should be
> about 2G in your case, don't know for sure. Increase of shared_pool_size
 is
> needed because when using MTX, private SQL areas are allocated within
 shared
> pool. My experience with MTS on HP-UX (32-bit) wasn't particulary good,
 because
> maximum for all shared memory areas is 1.7G in this case, and with 1200
> sessions it wasn't possible to have enough shared pool.
>
Received on Sun Jul 15 2001 - 03:43:58 CDT