That is a good question. I believe there is no white paper or recommendation
from BMC, like there is for the number of list and fast threads.
One place to look for guidance is with database performance monitoring tools.
In general terms, without delving into each database specifically, if the
database monitoring tool reports that there is too much contention on the
arschema table, you would increase this number. Large Remedy deployments can
have this number set to 100...
Unless you are the DBA too, I suggest you get your DBA involved in monitoring
the database. There are many things that can be done at the database level to
improve performance: partitioning, esoteric indexes, stored execution outlines,
caching lookup tables, etc, etc.
-Guillaume
________________________________
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) on behalf of Frex Popo
Sent: Wed 02/11/09 2:54 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: NEXT-BLOCK-ID-SIZE
**
Thanks Guillaume, will bear this point in mind for future customization.
Does anyone know how the server goes about assigning those id's in each block
to new requests. Are they assigned randomly or do they start from the smallest
and then onwards to the largest in the block.
What needs to be taken into consideration when deciding what number to set the
NEXT-BLOCK-ID-SIZE?
Kind Regards
frex
--- En date de : Mar 10.2.09, Guillaume Rheault <guilla...@dcshq.com> a écrit :
De: Guillaume Rheault <guilla...@dcshq.com>
Objet: Re: NEXT-BLOCK-ID-SIZE
À: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Date: Mardi 10 Février 2009, 17h22
As you know, the reason why this feature was implemented was to improve
performance by reducing the contention on the arschema table.
This feature mimics the Oracle sequence, which has the same issue:
there can be
gaps in the sequence because of instance crashes or rollback in
transactions.
I guess the general advise is not to rely on the Request ID field
(Field ID 1)
anymore for anything, as much as possible: ideally relationships would
be done
on the Instance ID field (field 179) instead, or some other criteria.
Actually
the ITSM apps aim that goal, so therefore we should too....
-Guillaume
________________________________
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) on behalf of Frex
Popo
Sent: Tue 02/10/09 10:41 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: NEXT-BLOCK-ID-SIZE
**
Dear all,
I have and ITSM7.0/ARS7.1 instalation, I have set the
NEXT-BLOCK-ID-SIZE to 10.
I would like to know how do you decide the size, is it based on the
number of
server threads, the number of DB processes, number of users etc etc? I
am aware
that if you restart the server you loose the sequencing, however are
there any
other implications if you set this too high?
The reason I am also asking is, I noticed that some requests which were
created
say @ 10AM (for the sake of argument!) have a sequence with a number
grater than
others which were created @ 11AM.
Many thanks in advance
frex
________________________________
Ne pleurez pas si votre Webmail ferme. Récupérez votre historique sur
Yahoo!
Mail
<http://fr.rd.yahoo.com/mail_fr/taglines/caramail/*http://fr.docs.yahoo.com/mail/transfert_mails.html>
__Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
html___
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
________________________________
Ne pleurez pas si votre Webmail ferme. Récupérez votre historique sur Yahoo!
Mail
<http://fr.rd.yahoo.com/mail_fr/taglines/caramail/*http://fr.docs.yahoo.com/mail/transfert_mails.html>
__Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" html___
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Platinum Sponsor: RMI Solutions ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
