Hello Mark, Thanks for your comments. This workaround would be an option. We'll have to look into that.
I did find that some work has been done when I was looking into the aio.c. And also that some parts have been discussed for some time now. The aio.c (and aio.h) have been changed to some extent in later kernel versions but I can't say if those changes would have any effect on our problem. Just for my good understanding (and for some input tomorrow at our next meeting). Suppose we would be able to open a service request, what would be the chance a kernel bug can be fixed through a service request? Based on the discussions on the aio.c my guess would be that a kernel fix would be difficult to get implemented, especially when a quick result is expected. Am I correct when I expect that the service would be close to an advice like changing specific parameters and/or install a newer kernel or patch? (Note that this is in no way to you personally, I expect kernel changes to be part of the kernel development team so any change in that part is outside the scope of any company that provides support. The problem is how to convince the upper level to view it the same way. As Alan did suggest, input for a MER.) Do you know by any chance what button to push for AIO in Oracle? I know that we did cover that when the server was installed 4 years ago but I didn't do that part myself. IIRC it was asynch_IO=yes or some parameter like that. Correct? Is there any guess as to what performance penalty this disable would give us? The server does hit it's limits quite often so I expect this question to be the next one. Regards, Berry. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
