What I do not like so much about setting these next block id's is that the sort order of the create date is often not in sync with the sort order of the Request ID's. But then again I guess if I really want that benefit of performance I have to live with that..
Might be a good idea to come to think of it to use it at the time of DSL import (during the install of ITSM apps) and then remove it after that is done.. Joe -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rick Cook Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 12:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Next ID Blocks in Server Groups ** We are upgrading to AR System 7.1 (no ITSM - all custom apps), and are looking at the potential performance gains of using the pre-allocated nextId blocks. I attended the BUW session where they talked about the optimal setting being about 100 for heavily used forms, but I got to thinking "What would happen in a fail-over situation? How do the servers play together with those pre-allocated blocks?" My thought was that at worst, the allocated but as yet unused portion of the block would be discarded, and a new one would be spawned on the new primary server, leaving ID gaps of between 1 and 99. That, we could live with. While digging through the 7.1 docs, I read this little gem in the O&T, which seems to sort of obliquely reinforce my opinion: The use of this configuration setting could result in unpredictably large NextID sequence gaps. The likelihood of this occurring increases with the use of multiple servers that share a database. The AR System server will not malfunction due to this gap and should not be considered a defect. Has someone been through this exercise who could offer some insight into whether there might be other issues to be aware of? Is this a setting that could be different for different servers in a group (not that I know why one WOULD, but...)? Also, I found it a bit disturbing that the documentation said to adjust this value in the ar.conf file when there is a setting in the Administration form for it (which the doc does not mention). They probably just didn't update that from 7.0.1, but it does tend to make one wonder about the completeness of the rest of the information. Rick No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.14/1425 - Release Date: 5/9/2008 12:38 PM _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
