Interesting, I think this is the first time that I’ve heard someone 
specifically call out Windows as being part of the problem rather than just a 
remote Oracle database.  Your response is actually encouraging, because we’re 
going to be switching over to Linux with the remote Oracle database.  Hopefully 
we’ll have better luck there…

Lyle

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe DeSouza
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 7:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ARS 7.1 server group issue

**
Its a known issue where ARS on Windows connected to a Remote Oracle database, 
takes forever to recache and that it takes forever to restart if the services 
have been stopped and is restarted. This is because of the way that data is 
read in chunks of 100 rows. It is as designed and Remedy has nothing to do with 
the design as its more how the Oracle client communicates to remote oracle 
databases when the client is on Windows..

I didn't experience the kinds of problems you are talking about on UNIX ARS 
Servers connected to remote Oracle databases.

So I guessed your configurations by the symptoms you described. Unfortunately 
you got to live with it unless you decide to move to UNIX.

Joe

________________________________
From: Lyle Taylor <tayl...@ldschurch.org>
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:02:40 PM
Subject: Re: ARS 7.1 server group issue
Correct……

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe DeSouza
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 3:20 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ARS 7.1 server group issue

**
Your AR Servers are probably on windows and connect to Oracle setup as a Remote 
database?

Joe

________________________________
From: Lyle Taylor <tayl...@ldschurch.org>
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:27:56 PM
Subject: Re: ARS 7.1 server group issue

**
I see server groups as being more useful for load balancing and redundancy.  
While you can indeed have users on the other systems while you perform the 
updates, the other servers become nearly unusable as the cache updates, 
especially for anything other than very minor changes.  I’ve simply had less 
issues if I simply bring down the other servers during the changes and then 
bring them back up again after.  In my experience, that actually provides a 
better user experience, because knowing that it’s down for a short time is 
easier to deal with than extremely slow performance during a cache update.

Lyle

From:


 NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) 
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized 
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the 
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all 
copies of the original message.


Reply via email to