Yeah, my server is configured with GB data files with 50MB dual log files w/
autolog activated so if this presents a problem with I/O on a ReiserFS
system then I may need to build up a new server using ext2 and transfer the
db to it.

What say Ye at SAP? Which is the best file system for SAPDB? journaled or
not?

-----Original Message-----
From: "H�bschen, Peter" [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 12:35 AM
To: Kevin Wilson; 'Nigel Campbell (DSL AK)'; 'Arne Gehlhaar'
Cc: Sapdb General List (E-mail)
Subject: AW: Hard disk lit-up like Christmas tree ???


Hello, 

in my opinion this article seems to be a little bit unclear:
Quote 1: "ReiserFS is more suited for work as a database server."
Quote 2: "Though it provides fast performance when reading and writing small
files, ReiserFS is fairly slow to manipulate large multi-megabyte files."

I don't know other database systems nor other Database administrators, but I
configured my SAPDB to use large files for storing my database, so ReiserFS
would be the wrong choice (see Quote 2). Maybe there is a database system
which stores its data in small files, then ReiserFS could be the right
choice.

Peter

> -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von:  Kevin Wilson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet am:  Donnerstag, 11. September 2003 16:27
> An:   'Nigel Campbell (DSL AK)'; 'Arne Gehlhaar'
> Cc:   Sapdb General List (E-mail)
> Betreff:      RE: Hard disk lit-up like Christmas tree ???
> 
> This article states that ReiserFS is particularly good for use on a
> database
> server machine, so which is correct? Is there just an issue with SAPDB
> that
> causes it to not work well with journaled file systems? I have ran MySQL
> on
> the ReiserFS for quite a while without any disk I/O issues at all.
> 
> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1160504,00.asp
> 
> Kevin
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nigel Campbell (DSL AK) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 8:26 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; Kevin Wilson
> Subject: FW: Hard disk lit-up like Christmas tree ???
> 
> 
> You're better off with ext2 (or raw partitions if you're feeling 
> really keen) for a database.  As a generalisation, it isn't 
> a good idea to put databases on a journalling file system for 
> the following reasons:
> 
>   (i) The journalling function is redundant as the database
>       does this anyway.  This generates redundant disk 
>       traffic.  
> 
>  (ii) Journalled file system logs are most definitely not 
>       optimised for database access patterns.  Databases 
>       generate lots of small writes to big files, which 
>       create disproportionately large log entries with lots 
>       of wasted space (i.e. entire 8k data-base blocks being 
>       written by the db and journalled by the filesystem for 
>       a single-row change).  This wastes a large amount of 
>       log space and places a big garbage colleciton burden 
>       on the logs.  In some journalling filesystsms such as 
>       LFS the log entries become the new disk blocks for the 
>       filesystem and the old ones are garbage collected - 
>       which would aggravate the external fragmentation of 
>       the database files.
> 
> (iii) JFS's don't keep filesystem metadata up-to-date in 
>       realtime - typically there is an asynchronous writer
>       process that goes through the log and writes out the
>       changes.  On a busy system, this may lead to a lot
>       of journaled-but-not-written changes which are 
>       inefficient, particularly if there is is significant
>       locality-of-reference.  The logs can also run out of 
>       space if a busy system can't keep up with the garbage 
>       collection.
> 
> I've seen an instance of Baan (an also-ran in the ERP racket)
> being deployed on an HP-UX box with journalling filesystems.
> This had persistent performance and space problems until 
> someone worked out that they were running the database on a 
> journalled filesystem.  After they reformatted the partitions
> as UFS (berkely FFS) the problems went away.
> 
> Nigel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 11 September 2003 10:11 a.m.
> To: Sapdb General List (E-mail)
> Subject: Hard disk lit-up like Christmas tree ???
> 
> 
> [System]
> SuSE v8.1 w/ using ReiserFS   
> SAPDB v7.3.0.34
> 
> Several sapdb processes are in a Uninterruptible Sleep state and
> kreiserfsd
> keeps popping in every so often. The hard disk is activity is very high
> and
> the database access is slower but still accessible.
> 
> Any ideas? 
> 
> Kevin
> 
> "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>      -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 
> _______________________________________________
> sapdb.general mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
> _______________________________________________
> sapdb.general mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
> _______________________________________________
> sapdb.general mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general
> 
> 
_______________________________________________
sapdb.general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://listserv.sap.com/mailman/listinfo/sapdb.general

Reply via email to