Or just move to advanced server.
| Murali_Pavuloori/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/16/2003 02:04 PM
|
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: RE: NT -> Win2K causes performance degradation.. |
We run oracle 9.2.0.3 on Win 2000 and have observed that whenever the
memory on ora.exe process reaches around 1.4G, our application runs into
"Listener unable to start a dedicated server process" At this point no one
will be able to connect to the db and we are forced to restart.
We are exploring to migrate the db on to Win 2003.
Murali.
|---------+---------------------------->
| | "Boivin, Patrice |
| | J" |
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | mpo.gc.ca> |
| | Sent by: |
| | [EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | .com |
| | |
| | |
| | 12/16/2003 03:44 |
| | PM |
| | Please respond to|
| | ORACLE-L |
| | |
|---------+---------------------------->
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| cc: |
| Subject: RE: NT -> Win2K causes performance degradation.. |
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
I'll throw gasoline on the fire here...
On Win2K you may hit resource limits when you get to 1.5G or so memory used
on a 4G server...
Because Windows allocates half the memory to the kernel processes, half to
the user processes.
Patrice.
-----Original Message-----
From: Yechiel Adar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: December 11, 2003 10:40 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: NT -> Win2K causes performance degradation..
The /3GB does not work for the simple reason that in W2K you have 3GB
as max address space. At least that what my sysadmin tells me (after
checking with MS).
Yechiel Adar
Mehish
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Drake
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: NT -> Win2K causes performance degradation..
Mark,
My guess is, that the new OS re-instated the file system caching.
By default, 41% (yes, it should have been 42%) of physical memory
will be allocated to filesystem caching, as W2K thinks it a
fileserver (and domain controller, web server, print server, etc)
until you tell it otherwise.
This is much improved in w2k3 server - where you tell it what you
want it to be.
A good sysadmin would have set the OS to "optimize throughput for
network applications" which would have turned off the filesystem
caching. Ok, its only one radio button to select, so an MSCE could
set it also.
Surprisingly enough, in W2K Server - changing this setting does not
require a reboot, although I don't know if the changes take effect
until after a system restart. That's not the sort of thing that I
usually test, as NT4 had me trained to reboot afterwards.
the other thing may be, that the boot.ini no longer supports the
/3GB or /PAE switches as Jared mentioned - but that should not cause
the symptoms you are reporting.
hth.
Paul
Mark Leith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi All,
We've been asked a question from one of our clients that I'm a
little
stumped on.
They run an OLTP database (Oracle 8.1.7), and have recently
upgraded their
NT machine to Windows 2000, they were running with 2gb of memory,
and
upgraded that to 4gb in the process. As they increased physical
memory, they
also increased their SGA size & db_block_buffers.
Since they've upgraded they have noticed a significant decrease in
performance (the way it was described to me was "it was 7 out of
10, and is
now 3 out of 10"..).
Has anybody else done a system upgrade of this nature that has
caused less
than desirable effects? Any pointers as to what to look at? We've
requested
some stats (top wait stats etc.) and I'll feed these back as and
when I get
them - but I thought I'd throw this out to you guys in the vague
hope thatsomeone has experienced some relatively similar
experiences.
Cheers!
Mark
===================================================
Mark Leith | T: +44 (0)1905 330 281
Sales & Marketing | F: +44 (0)870 127 5283
Cool Tools UK Ltd | E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===================================================
http://www.cool-tools.co.uk
Maximising throughput & performance
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.547 / Virus Database: 340 - Release Date: 02/12/2003
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Mark Leith
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Ma! il message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like
subscribing).
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author:
INET: Murali_Pavuloori/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
