Hi Thomas, nice to get a response from you. We already met in ~2010 in Linz at your office :) (ex. SEM GmbH, later Playmonitor GmbH)
First, sorry for posting a mixed state of informations. The config settings i postet are the current settings. But the Lock-Table-Header was from last saturday (day of total system crash) - we changed Hash Slot Value since than, but it didn't work. New Table looks like: LOCK_HEADER BLOCK Version: 16, Active owner: 0, Length: 134247728, Used: 55790260 Semmask: 0x0, Flags: 0x0001 Enqs: 1806423519, Converts: 4553851, Rejects: 5134185, Blocks: 56585419 Deadlock scans: 82, Deadlocks: 0, Scan interval: 10 Acquires: 2058846891, Acquire blocks: 321584126, Spin count: 0 Mutex wait: 15.6% Hash slots: 20011, Hash lengths (min/avg/max): 0/ 7/ 18 Remove node: 0, Insert queue: 0, Insert prior: 0 Owners (297): forward: 385160, backward: 38086352 Free owners (43): forward: 52978748, backward: 20505128 Free locks (41802): forward: 180712, backward: 3620136 Free requests (-1097572396): forward: 46948676, backward: 13681252 Lock Ordering: Enabled The Min/Avg/Max hash lengths look better now, but as you mentioned the Mutex wait is worring us too. We have 2 direct questions about that. 1) What are the negative effects of increasing Hash-Slots (too high)? 2) As far as we know, we can't influence Mutex wait directly (it's just informational). But do you think that's the reason the underlying hardware is not utilized? We do consider to upgrade to 2.5, but had our eyes on FB 3 over the last year, waiting for it to get ready. With 2.5.x we tested around a long time now, but never found a real reason to upgrade - since it's a reasonable amount of work for us. When you say it improves the lock contention, this sound pretty good. But again the question, do you think lock contention is limiting our system? First and foremost, we would really like to find the bottleneck. We just don't have the know-how to imagine something like "Fb 2.1 Engine is limiting us because of ..." and without that knowledge it's hard to take actions like upgrading to 2.5. We'll try to collect information about the garbage we create :) We do run "Sinatica Monitoring" on the server, which shows us "Awaiting Gargabe Collection" Transactions. Is that the information you'r looking for? Maybe to avoid confusion, we don't have normal "Spikes" .. the system just starts to slow down and this state remains until the server-load is gone (after midnight, when software is not used anymore). Best Regards, Patrick Friessnegg Synesc GmbH
