- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- wcache oddity
Operating System - HP-UX
1753894
Members
8042
Online
108809
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
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
Forums
Discussions
юдл
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
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Go to solution
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
тАО03-16-2009 03:42 PM
тАО03-16-2009 03:42 PM
What up HP folk:
Question for you all. I've got a standby server with standby databases. Its life is all about oracle archive log sync ups. It is notoriously slow. Slow to the point that everyone hates it. Performance analysis reveals only one thing, single digit %wcache in the sar -b reports. Rule of thumb is 75% for wcache but I've accepted lower. I've never seen single digits though.
The box is the same as every other VPar on five superdomes. All pa-risc domes, all 8 cpu per VPar.
Reading about %wcache performance suggests re-indexing the database, or, problems with writing too much unstructured data. I read this as structured data living in a data base and unstructured data living in a flat file.
Love to hear the best and brightest insights on this!
Thanks!
Question for you all. I've got a standby server with standby databases. Its life is all about oracle archive log sync ups. It is notoriously slow. Slow to the point that everyone hates it. Performance analysis reveals only one thing, single digit %wcache in the sar -b reports. Rule of thumb is 75% for wcache but I've accepted lower. I've never seen single digits though.
The box is the same as every other VPar on five superdomes. All pa-risc domes, all 8 cpu per VPar.
Reading about %wcache performance suggests re-indexing the database, or, problems with writing too much unstructured data. I read this as structured data living in a data base and unstructured data living in a flat file.
Love to hear the best and brightest insights on this!
Thanks!
Support Fatherhood - Stop Family Law
Solved! Go to Solution.
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО03-16-2009 06:08 PM
тАО03-16-2009 06:08 PM
Solution
What are the actual bwrit/lwrite write rates?
If Oracle is using direct-io, then it should be bypassing the buffer cache. The rates would be low, and the %wcache rate irrelevant. ?!
http://docs.hp.com/en/B3921-90010/sar.1M.html
" %wcache
Buffer cache hit ratio for write requests e.g., 1 - bwrit/lwrit;"
Also, for standby, you would hope Oracle would a DB page once and only once. How could the write cache be doing anything useful if oracle is doing a good job?
Sounds like ITRC topic # 672181
That topic mentions "Oracle recommends".
And indeed recent Oracle documentation (
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b15658/tuning.htm )
indicates:
"The %rcache column value should be greater than 90 and the %wcache column value should be greater than 60. Otherwise, the system may be disk I/O bound."
But this is for a 'real database' (and even for that I have my doubts about the validity of the statement). A standby DB is a different animal!
Allthough admittedly I have little ahnds-on experience with standby databases, I would expact them likely to be IO bound. It has no serious computing, searching, optimizing to do!
Now, please don't get me wrong, I'm sure you are not asking an idle (sic) question here.
I'm sure there is a real problem, but I do strongly doubt that %wcache is a useful indicator. At best it is an effect, not a root cause.
So lets try to find some more pertinent indicators!
What does the top-ten wait events for the the standby database show in STATSPACK or AWR?
What are the rough data rates? How much archive data coming in? How much CPU time burned?
Hope this helps some,
Hein van den Heuvel ( at gmail dot com )
HvdH Performance Consulting
If Oracle is using direct-io, then it should be bypassing the buffer cache. The rates would be low, and the %wcache rate irrelevant. ?!
http://docs.hp.com/en/B3921-90010/sar.1M.html
" %wcache
Buffer cache hit ratio for write requests e.g., 1 - bwrit/lwrit;"
Also, for standby, you would hope Oracle would a DB page once and only once. How could the write cache be doing anything useful if oracle is doing a good job?
Sounds like ITRC topic # 672181
That topic mentions "Oracle recommends".
And indeed recent Oracle documentation (
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b15658/tuning.htm )
indicates:
"The %rcache column value should be greater than 90 and the %wcache column value should be greater than 60. Otherwise, the system may be disk I/O bound."
But this is for a 'real database' (and even for that I have my doubts about the validity of the statement). A standby DB is a different animal!
Allthough admittedly I have little ahnds-on experience with standby databases, I would expact them likely to be IO bound. It has no serious computing, searching, optimizing to do!
Now, please don't get me wrong, I'm sure you are not asking an idle (sic) question here.
I'm sure there is a real problem, but I do strongly doubt that %wcache is a useful indicator. At best it is an effect, not a root cause.
So lets try to find some more pertinent indicators!
What does the top-ten wait events for the the standby database show in STATSPACK or AWR?
What are the rough data rates? How much archive data coming in? How much CPU time burned?
Hope this helps some,
Hein van den Heuvel ( at gmail dot com )
HvdH Performance Consulting
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО11-02-2009 01:48 AM
тАО11-02-2009 01:48 AM
Re: wcache oddity
.
Support Fatherhood - Stop Family Law
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