Hi,
I have a question, how you run 2 command? using script or manually. Because
i think that if you run by manuall, you can not enter 2 command "date" in
the same time.


On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Pawel Piaskowy <[email protected]> wrote:

> **
> Hi,
>
> Errata:
> (To my knowledge) Group locks have nothing to do with record level locks
> and are short-lived, used when content of record is physically read or
> written ***or when file is traversed*** (record locks are kept as long as
> you keep lock in your program or jBase transaction is active).
>
> Hope there are no more mistakes :)
>
> Kind regards
> Pawel
> Wysłano z BlackBerry®
> ------------------------------
> *From: * "Pawel Piaskowy" <[email protected]>
> *Date: *Tue, 4 Sep 2012 13:43:56 +0000
> *To: *<[email protected]>
> *ReplyTo: * [email protected]
> *Subject: *Re: Strange COUNT/SELECT behavior on AIX
>
> Hi,
>
> We were also suprised a bit by such behaviour. I think there are 3 factors
> related to your observation:
> a) OS level (or SAN) caching
> b) distributed file (no sure about JPlus files, but they are
> self-distributed? Is there anything like distribution routine?)
> c) groups locks taken on selected (part)file
>
> Below information applies to jBase 4 and it may or may not be relevant to
> jBase 5 or JPlus files:
> jBase doing full scan of file has to traverse file group by group. Process
> needs to take "group lock" on each block of file ("group") to avoid dirty
> read of information and synchronize all concurrently running processes
> (some could write and some could read to the same group at the same time).
> In jBase 4 these group locks are taken using "native" (OS) locking
> mechanism - disregarding wheter you use jRLA or not (jRLA causes that
> record locks are taken using pthreads library and are actually maintained
> as semaphores in shared memory segment).
>
> (To my knowledge) Group locks have nothing to do with record level locks
> and are short-lived, used when content of record is physically read or
> written (record locks are kept as long as you keep lock in your program or
> jBase transaction is active).
>
> I think that above description applies also to your, jBase 5 situation -
> none of the SELECT processes can finish before 1st SELECT is completed. 1st
> SELECT is a greedy process and once it finishes processing of group 1 it
> immediately releases group lock 1and immediately takes group lock of group
> 2. Some other SELECT process had to be very fast to process group 1 and
> take lock of group 2 before 1st SELECT does it. It is theoretically
> possible, but practically impossible in my opinion.
>
> Practically impossible because:
> a) taking lock takes time (OS level locking does not perform well on all
> kind of architectures, eg. it is much slower than semaphores on IBM P7
> servers)
> b) jBase needs to get IDs from locked group which (in case of poorly sized
> file) means it requires few more block reads. Of course information is
> usually already in OS/SAN cache because 1st SELECT process did this work.
> "Taking" IDs requires also few cycles.
> c) (not 100% sure) In case of distributed files and selection criteria
> given SELECT needs to apply filtering criteria to each ID it finds. That
> means lot of extra work.
>
> It seems to me also that currently jBase (at least 4.x) invokes
> (unnecessarily, unexplainably) distribution routine for each ID it sees.
> This is adding lot of overhead to the processing (even in cases when
> distribution routine is very simple). That was our observation if I
> remember well.
>
> The last thing that I would like to share my thoughs is general locking
> concept. Bad thing is that these group locks seem to be exclusive locks. In
> my opinion they theoretically could be shared read. However I may be wrong
> or miss something.
>
> Finally: jBase team spotted some of the problems and introduced
> alternative method of group locking in jBase. Since jBase 4.1.5.37
> semaphores may be used as group locking mechanism. That should perform much
> better on P7. Change was also prepared for jBase 5 I think. We are in the
> middle of testing - it looks very promising although we had one concern.
>
> By the way: which jBase, what kind of server are you running on? What
> criteria did you give to SELECT/COUNT? How jPlus files perform?
>
> Group members: please correct me if I wrote something misleading or
> something that is not truth.
>
> Kind regards
> Pawel
> Wysłano z BlackBerry®
> ------------------------------
> *From: * DD <[email protected]>
> *Sender: * [email protected]
> *Date: *Tue, 4 Sep 2012 01:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
> *To: *<[email protected]>
> *ReplyTo: * [email protected]
> *Subject: *Strange COUNT/SELECT behavior on AIX
>
> Dear all,
>
> We are migrating our application (T24) on jBASE from HP-UX to AIX. We are
> experiencing some strange behavior of SELECT (and COUNT) on large files
> (JPlus, >2GB). Apart from being slower on AIX (which may have to do with
> SAN), there is something else that I cannot explain.
>
> If I start the same COUNT from different ssh sessions, all finish at
> exactly the same time:
>
> jsh t24adm ~ -->date
> Tue Aug 21 15:23:59 METDST 2012
> jsh t24adm ~ -->COUNT FBNK.RE.CONSOL.SPEC.ENTRY
>
> 12482387 Records counted
>
> jsh t24adm ~ -->date
> Tue Aug 21 *17:46:16* METDST 2012
>
> The above process took almost 2,5 hours. The below one I started much
> later on the same environment from another session, but they came back at
> the very same second:
>
> jsh t24adm ~ -->time COUNT FBNK.RE.CONSOL.SPEC.ENTRY
>
> 12482403 Records counted
>
> usr: 11.51   sys: 14.82   elapsed: 47m33.02s
> jsh t24adm ~ -->date
> Tue Aug 21 *17:46:16* METDST 2012
>
> This is not a coincidence, I saw it many times.
> Any ideas?
>
>  --
> --
> IMPORTANT: T24/Globus posts are no longer accepted on this forum.
>
> To post, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/jBASE?hl=en
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> IMPORTANT: T24/Globus posts are no longer accepted on this forum.
>
> To post, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/jBASE?hl=en
>
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
IMPORTANT: T24/Globus posts are no longer accepted on this forum.

To post, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jBASE?hl=en



Reply via email to