> What do you mean by UFS wasn't an option due to
> number of files?
Exactly that. UFS has a 1 million file limit under Solaris. Each Oracle
Financials environment well exceeds this limitation.
> Also do you have any tunables in system?
> Can you send 'zpool status' output? (raidz, mirror,
> ...?)
Our tunables are:
set noexec_user_stack=1
set sd:sd_max_throttle = 32
set sd:sd_io_time = 0x3c
zpool status:
> zpool status
pool: d
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
d ONLINE 0 0 0
c5t60060E800475AA00000075AA0000100Bd0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c5t60060E800475AA00000075AA0000100Dd0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c5t60060E800475AA00000075AA0000100Cd0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c5t60060E800475AA00000075AA0000100Ed0 ONLINE 0 0 0
errors: No known data errors
> "When the DBA?s do clones" - you mean that by just
> doing 'zfs clone
> ...' you get big performance problem? OR maybe just
> before when you do
> 'zfs snapshot' first? How much free space is left in
> a pool?
Nope. The DBA group clones the production instance using OEM in order to build
copies for Education, development, etc. This is strictly an Oracle function,
not a file system (ZFS) operation.
> Do you have sar data when problems occured? Any
> paging in a system?
Some. I'll have to have the other analyst try to pull out the times when our
testing was done, but I've been told nothing stood out. (I love playing
middle-man. NOT!)
> And one advise - before any more testing I would
> definitely
> upgrade/reinstall system to U3 when it comes to ZFS.
Not an option. This isn't even a faint possibility. We're talking both our
test/development servers, and our production/education. That's six servers to
upgrade (remember, we have a the applications on servers distinct from the
database servers--the DBA's would never let us divurge the OS releases).
Rainer
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
