This is the sample results we get for both the ATS. For an average size of objects fetched for 26K,ram cache config variable set to 100M and ram cache cut off set to 100M for both these, we get for ATS1. Storage config has /dev/sda for ATS2 and /dev/sdb for ATS1
TPS: 20910 BW: 4.34928 ATS1 CPU utiliation: 49.90% ATS1 server load: 1.52 Latency of ATS1 which is loaded avr 0.76 Latency of the other idle ATS2(SSD) avr 0.15 And for ATS2 TPS: 22324 BW:4.643392 ATS2 CPU utiliation 51.40% AT2S server load 2.55 Latency of ATS2 WHICH IS LOADED: avr 0.715 Latenc of the AT1 which is idle Avr 0.15 There is not much difference in the TPS as well. Is there any other way we can reduce the latency, Am I missing some RAM configuration. Are there any other parameters I can configure, for better performance? Thanks & Regards Saraswathi Venkataraman | Xoriant Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Winchester, Hiranandani Business Park, Powai, Mumbai 400076, INDIA. Tel: +91 22 30511000 | Ext: 1113 | http://www.xoriant.com<http://www.xoriant.com/> From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 8:25 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Saraswathi Venkataraman Subject: Re: Cache configuration On 6/29/12 12:52 AM, Saraswathi Venkataraman wrote: I have an ATS which is connected to RAID5 and another ATS which is an SSD These are the raw disk available on ATS1 AND ATS2 respectively. Disk /dev/sda: 6301.1 GB, 6301058621440 bytes Disk /dev/sdb: 900.2 GB, 900151926784 bytes On ATS2: Disk /dev/sda: 3584.5 GB, 3584534339584 bytes Disk /dev/sdb: 512.1 GB, 512076636160 bytes Nothing rings any bells, I'd expect the SSD to outperform the SSD by several magnitudes. :/ -- Leif
