On 11/16/2012 09:03 AM, Russell Beall wrote:
Our production servers (three replicants) are equipped with 128GB. We
started maxing out the 64G chips that used to be in there and had to
upgrade. This is for a similarly sized id2entry file, however, the
memory we use primarily is not for database cache but is for the entry
cache.
This memory size applies to Sun Directory Server 6.3. We are
transitioning to 389, and 389 uses about half the memory required for
the entry cache, so we probably can get by with 64G for those nodes,
but with Linux, we have been experiencing the memory fragmentation
problem which grows the memory requirements significantly when lots of
modifies are done. For this reason, we are also going with 128G for
that environment.
Ultimately, you will need to test for performance, but definitely test
with larger memory sizes and larger cache sizes to verify what speed
improvements you might get. Speed can be very seriously impacted when
the cache is not tuned well and doesn't have enough space for decent
response time.
You will also need to monitor dbcache and entry cache usage, to make
sure your settings are applicable. See
https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Directory_Server/9.0/html/Administration_Guide/Monitoring_Server_and_Database_Activity-Monitoring_Database_Activity.html
Regards,
Russ.
==============================
Russell Beall
Programmer Analyst IV
Enterprise Identity Management
University of Southern California
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
==============================
On Nov 16, 2012, at 6:30 AM, P R <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,
First off, my server is equipped with 12GB of physical memory. From
reading tuning guides online, I’ve found that a starting estimate for
the ‘dbcachesize’ = SUM(allDB4files). For one of my directory
instances, the id2entry.db4 file alone is ~ 11GB.
Performance wise, would it be worthwhile to increase the amount of
physical memory on the server (perhaps 64-128GB)? Or does 11GB for an
id2entry seem like an extremely high value that’s out of the
operating capabilities of the directory? Is it unheard of for a
production directory server to be equipped with 64GB of physical memory?
Thanks,
pwr
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
