Reasons I see why it won't work: - tcp ports can not be shared on a single interface; you can not load balance two servers on the same host
Reasons why you don't want to point two servers to the same db and not use server groups: - subsystems will be running twice - escalation server, email engine, approval server, etc. - two admin threads - there will be concurrency issues should there be a collision Could you share more about what you are trying to accomplish. Arserver is multi-threaded in how it handles most types of operations; the exceptions being the admin thread and the escalation thread (prior to 7.1). Context switching is going to be faster between threads than it will with processes in most cases; with that in mind, you will have greater throughput on a single host running a single instance of arserver on one host that running multiple instances of arserver on the same host. Axton Grams On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 9:31 AM, LJ Longwing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I believe what David was saying is that if you have two Remedy servers > pointing at the same DB, then the only supported method of doing that is > with a server group. The reason behind this is that is the only way to > ensure that the servers don't step on each other. And Remedy doesn't > support two Remedy servers located on the same machine, in a server group > (the only supported way to point both to the same db). So in short....you > can't do what you are trying to do. If you want multiple Remedy's pointing > to the same DB, they need to be on separate machines, if you want them on > the same machine, you need to point them to separate DB's. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Icarus4 > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 4:01 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Multiple Instance of ARS 6.3 on Shared database > > There is no server group. It is another ARS instance on the same hardware > box sharing one single database. > > I'm just wondering if performance would be better if we separate all admin > duties on a separate instance. I know it will not change the fact that > database objects will be locked during edition by the admin instance and > that the other instance will have to wait, but I thought maybe server > resources would be used more efficiently this way. > > That's the kind of comparison I'm looking for. We currently don't have a dev > box where I could perform some load testings that would show something. > > > Easter, David wrote: >> >>> Instances will share the same database. >> >> One thing to consider is that "sharing the same database" appears to >> imply that you'll be putting both instances into the same server group >> - and server groups aren't supported for multiple instances on the >> same physical server. >> >> -David J. Easter >> Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development BMC Software, >> Inc. >> >> The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed >> in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. >> My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a >> role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for >> BMC Software, Inc. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Icarus4 >> Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 6:05 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Multiple Instance of ARS 6.3 on Shared database >> >> Hello listers, >> >> I'm considering installing multiple instance of ARS 6.3 on the same box. >> Instances will share the same database. >> >> Anyone did a performance comparison between single and multiple >> instances? >> Does it bring a better usage of the server resources? >> >> Thanks for sharing. >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Multiple-Instance-of-ARS-6.3-on-Shared-database- >> tp >> 19414834p19414834.html >> Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> __ >> _______ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum >> Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> _________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Multiple-Instance-of-ARS-6.3-on-Shared-database-tp1941 > 4834p19508803.html > Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. > > ____________________________________________________________________________ > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: > www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > > _______________________________________________________________________________ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
