- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- VMS 7.3-2 Copy slow on Alpha
Operating System - OpenVMS
1753621
Members
5764
Online
108797
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
02-23-2009 03:03 AM
02-23-2009 03:03 AM
Re: VMS 7.3-2 Copy slow on Alpha
John,
Several things to consider:
More than a single system is involved, so a problem on either end can affect performance. You need to look at both systems' memory.
As Volker said, the NPAG_GENTLE and NPAG_AGGRESSIVE parameters are dynamic and therefore they can be changed without a reboot. However, most of the pool fragmentation due to frequent allocation and deallocation from the variable list will remain until the system is rebooted.
Just rebooting itself will "defragment" the pool, so the problem may no longer exhibit itself for a while (or until you run something that thrashes the pool). The fact that the systems haven't been booted for a long period of time suggests that the pool has had an opportunity to be fragmented, especially if pool reclamation is enabled.
Setting the NPAG_GENTLE and NPAG_AGGRESSIVE parameters to 100 will perhaps require more non-paged pool, but it should reduce the fragmentation of the free space in the pool.
What version of VMS are you running? Later versions have more lookaside lists. I don't know what size packets DECnet V is requesting; if they are larger than the size of the largest lookaside list blocksize, then they must be allocated from the variable list, and that gets expensive when the free pool gets fragmented.
Guessing here. Perhaps by specifying a larger windowsize, more buffers are allocated and then reused without freeing/allocating. So perhaps an optimal solution is a combination of turning off reclamation, and specifying a larger windowsize.
Jon
Several things to consider:
More than a single system is involved, so a problem on either end can affect performance. You need to look at both systems' memory.
As Volker said, the NPAG_GENTLE and NPAG_AGGRESSIVE parameters are dynamic and therefore they can be changed without a reboot. However, most of the pool fragmentation due to frequent allocation and deallocation from the variable list will remain until the system is rebooted.
Just rebooting itself will "defragment" the pool, so the problem may no longer exhibit itself for a while (or until you run something that thrashes the pool). The fact that the systems haven't been booted for a long period of time suggests that the pool has had an opportunity to be fragmented, especially if pool reclamation is enabled.
Setting the NPAG_GENTLE and NPAG_AGGRESSIVE parameters to 100 will perhaps require more non-paged pool, but it should reduce the fragmentation of the free space in the pool.
What version of VMS are you running? Later versions have more lookaside lists. I don't know what size packets DECnet V is requesting; if they are larger than the size of the largest lookaside list blocksize, then they must be allocated from the variable list, and that gets expensive when the free pool gets fragmented.
Guessing here. Perhaps by specifying a larger windowsize, more buffers are allocated and then reused without freeing/allocating. So perhaps an optimal solution is a combination of turning off reclamation, and specifying a larger windowsize.
Jon
it depends
- « Previous
- Next »
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP