- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Legacy
- >
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- >
- Re: ubc_overflow
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
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
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- 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
тАО08-12-2004 07:25 PM
тАО08-12-2004 07:25 PM
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО08-12-2004 08:17 PM
тАО08-12-2004 08:17 PM
SolutionThe ubc_overflow parameter needs to be set to 0 for a GS80/160/320 server.
Prior to V5.1B PK #3 (BL24), caching activities for any given file would be constrained solely on a per RAD basis [where the referencing thread was executing]. Under certain load conditions, this would lead to heavy thrashing between files competing for resources. Enabling ubc_overflow tends to reduce the
contention by allowing caching activities to failover to another RAD where resources are more readily available. However, several factors namely: type of access, symmetry of memory resources, remote reference latencies,
and I/O proximities - can signficantly impact overal performance.
On GS320 [and derivative] platforms, testing indicated that enabling ubc_overflow tended to yield a gain when ubc_maxpercent was greater than 40 and file accesses were
generally random.
Therefore, in order to prevent possible system performance degradation, it may be necessary to reset the ubc_overflow parameter
to "0", especially when ubc_maxpercent is set to a low value, or for applications doing a large number of sequential file accesses.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-31-2005 07:07 PM
тАО05-31-2005 07:07 PM
Re: ubc_overflow
Is ubc_overflow=-1 on a GS1280 the reason, that borrowed UBC is not freed, if memory pages are needed by other RADs to avoid
low memory condition?
I mentioned that problem on
http://forums1.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=859125
but without any response.
I read that ubc_overflow can be -1, 0 or 1.
You are saying that ubc_overflow can be set or reset. Is 0 resetting? Is 1 setting? What about -1?
Can ubc_overflow set on the running system or do I need to reboot? Is there still no documentation?
Thanks in advance for answers.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-02-2005 12:03 AM
тАО06-02-2005 12:03 AM
Re: ubc_overflow
ubc_overflow is -1 per default. This means, the op.-system itself decides, if ubc_overflow will be used or not depending on hw-architecture and other settings. ubc_overflow can be set dynamically with
"sysconfig -r vm ubc_overflow=x". 0 means no ubc_overflow will be used, 1 means it will be used.
Once can check the actual setting (also if automatically set) by:
kdbx -k /vmunix
(kdbx) px *(struct rad *)rad_ptr[0]
struct {
rad_id = 0x0
rad_state = 0x1
rad_mad = 0xfffffc00023b8000
..
..
(kdbx) px ((struct memory_affinity_domain *)0xfffffc00023b8000).md_ubc.ubc_overflow
Regards, Erich
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-02-2005 12:32 AM
тАО06-02-2005 12:32 AM
Re: ubc_overflow
Thanks for your helpfull explanations.
I tried it, but I got:
kdbx -k /vmunix
dbx version 5.1
Type 'help' for help.
thread 0xfffffc00785b2a80 stopped at [thread_block:3307 ,0xffffffff000ba1f0] Source not available
warning: Files compiled -g3: parameter values probably wrong
(kdbx) px *(struct rad *)rad_ptr[0]
rad_mad = 0xfffffc0013d56000
(kdbx) px ((struct memory_affinity_domain *)0xfffffc0013d56000)\
.md_ubc.ubc_overflow
0x7360e
(kdbx) px ((struct memory_affinity_domain *)0xfffffc0013d56000).md_ubc
struct {
ubc_lru_lock = 0xc0000145002db8f2
ubc_lru = 0xc0000146002dbbb2
...
ubc_borrowlimit = 0x14319
...
ubc_minpages = 0x784df777
ubc_maxpages = 0x0
...
ubc_overflow = 0x7360e
Pointer seem to be shifted somehow.
So did debugging failed because of the kernel patch (T64KIT0025519-V51BB25-20050505)?
Joerg
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-02-2005 01:54 AM
тАО06-02-2005 01:54 AM
Re: ubc_overflow
sorry, there have been changes from BL24 to BL25 (patchkit 3 to patchkit 4), I will try to find it out.
Erich