Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Jul 2001 16:46:30 -0700 | From | Brian Strand <> | Subject | Re: 2x Oracle slowdown from 2.2.16 to 2.4.4 |
| |
Lance Larsh wrote:
>On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Brian Strand wrote: > >>Our Oracle configuration is on reiserfs on lvm on Mylex. >> >I can pretty much tell you it's the reiser+lvm combination that is hurting >you here. At the 2.5 kernel summit a few months back, I reported that > Why did it get so much worse going from 2.2.16 to 2.4.4, with an otherwise-identical configuration? We had reiserfs+lvm under 2.2.16 too.
> >some of our servers experienced as much as 10-15x slowdown after we moved >to 2.4. As it turned out, the problem was that the new servers (with >identical hardware to the old servers) were configured to use reiser+lvm, >whereas the older servers were using ext2 without lvm. When we rebuilt >the new servers with ext2 alone, the problem disappeared. (Note that we >also tried reiserfs without lvm, which was 5-6x slower than ext2 without >lvm.) > >I ran lots of iozone tests which illustrated a huge difference in write >throughput between reiser and ext2. Chris Mason sent me a patch which >improved the reiser case (removing an unnecessary commit), but it was >still noticeably slower than ext2. Therefore I would recommend that >at this time reiser should not be used for Oracle database files. > How do ext2+lvm, rawio+lvm, ext2 w/o lvm, and rawio w/o lvm compare in terms of Oracle performance? I am going to try a migration if 2.4.6 doesn't make everything better; do you have any suggestions as to the relative performance of each strategy?
Thanks, Brian
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |