RE: lock table overflow

Exactly, my last counter reset was about 7 days ago when i got informix down for maintenance. I will try changing and tunning the parameter. thanks -----Mensaje original----- De: Everett Mills [mailto:eemills@nationalbeef.com] Enviado el: Mi'rcoles, 20 de Agosto de 2003 05:14 p.m. Para: informix-list@iiug.org Asunto: RE: lock table overflow Francisco- Maybe... is your performance degraded? It looks like your counters were last reset (onstat -z) about a week ago. My server has had 23,000 bufwaits in 15 hours, yours has had almost 4,000,000 in 7 days (assuming a 5 minute checkpoint). You could most likely improve your bufwaits some by adding more buffers. Will that buy you a visible improvement? Maybe. The only way to tell is to try. --EEM -----Original Message----- From: Francisco Roldan [mailto:froldan@5b.com.gt] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 6:03 PM To: Everett Mills; informix-list@iiug.org Subject: RE: lock table overflow I have these onconfig parameters : LOCKS 200000 BUFFERS 50000 And onstat -p shows : ovlock ovuserthread ovbuff usercpu syscpu numckpts flushes 0 0 0 74218.73 45534.51 2159 4340 bufwaits lokwaits lockreqs deadlks dltouts ckpwaits compress seqscans 3927560 233 835904429 0 0 5467 201123 331942 Do I need to increase the parameters? thanks -----Mensaje original----- De: Everett Mills [mailto:eemills@nationalbeef.com] Enviado el: Mi'rcoles, 20 de Agosto de 2003 04:31 p.m. Para: informix-list@iiug.org Asunto: RE: lock table overflow An excerpt from my onconfig: LOCKS 250000 # Maximum number of locks BUFFERS 60000 # Maximum number of shared buffers Note that BUFFERS and LOCKS depend on how much RAM you can dedicate to Informix. I have 2GB, so 60,000 buffers isn't a whole lot, really. Unless you are scrambling for RAM, I'd bump your locks to at least 50,000 and buffers to at least 2,000-3,000. The book says add buffers to account for 1/4 of your physical memory... that would be excessive for most applications. -EEM -----Original Message----- From: Bill Hamilton [mailto:bham@finsco.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 2:05 PM To: malcolm.iiug; informix-list iiug Subject: Re: lock table overflow After bringing the server online for about 2 hours, onstat -p shows" ovrlocks = 12 ovrbufs = 23 bufwaits = 265372 lokreqs = 64million+ In onconfig: LOCKS = 20,000BUFFS = 200 Does this seem reasonable? If not, what values would be appropriate? What other parameters should I check? > Bill, > what is onstat -p showing for ovlocks? > sending to informix-list sending to informix-list sending to informix-list sending to informix-list

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 19:53:45 -0400, Francisco Roldan wrote: Actually, while adding more buffers can have a positive effect on bufwaits, especially if ovbuf is not tiny or if your BTR (Buffer Turnover Ratio) is large (s/b about 6/hr or less ideally), adding LRUs can have a more dramatic effect on bufwaits. Most bufwaits are caused by LRU waits rather than actual buffer waits. Check your BR (Bufwaits Ratio) if it is below 7 you are likely OK and are experiencing normal bufwaits levels. Values for BR over 7 indicate a slow system that can be tuned better and a BR of 10 or more indicates a system that is crawling. Art S. Kagel > Exactly, my last counter reset was about 7 days ago when i got informix > down for maintenance. > > I will try changing and tunning the parameter. > > thanks > > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Everett Mills [mailto:eemills@nationalbeef.com] Enviado el: > Mi'''rcoles, 20 de Agosto de 2003 05:14 p.m. Para: informix-list@iiug.org > Asunto: RE: lock table overflow > > > Francisco- > Maybe... is your performance degraded? It looks like your counters > were last reset (onstat -z) about a week ago. My server has had 23,000 > bufwaits in 15 hours, yours has had almost 4,000,000 in 7 days (assuming > a 5 minute checkpoint). You could most likely improve your bufwaits > some by adding more buffers. Will that buy you a visible improvement? > Maybe. The only way to tell is to try. > > --EEM > -----Original Message----- > From: Francisco Roldan [mailto:froldan@5b.com.gt] Sent: Wednesday, > August 20, 2003 6:03 PM To: Everett Mills; informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: RE: lock table overflow > > I have these onconfig parameters : > > LOCKS 200000 > BUFFERS 50000> > And onstat -p shows : > > ovlock ovuserthread ovbuff usercpu syscpu numckpts flushes 0 > 0 0 74218.73 45534.51 2159 4340 > > bufwaits lokwaits lockreqs deadlks dltouts ckpwaits compress seqscans > 3927560 233 835904429 0 0 5467 201123 331942 > > Do I need to increase the parameters? > > thanks > > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Everett Mills [mailto:eemills@nationalbeef.com] Enviado el: > Mi'''rcoles, 20 de Agosto de 2003 04:31 p.m. Para: informix-list@iiug.org > Asunto: RE: lock table overflow > > > An excerpt from my onconfig: > > LOCKS 250000 # Maximum number of locks BUFFERS> 60000 # Maximum number of shared buffers > > Note that BUFFERS and LOCKS depend on how much RAM you can dedicate to > Informix. I have 2GB, so 60,000 buffers isn't a whole lot, really. > Unless you are scrambling for RAM, I'd bump your locks to at least > 50,000 and buffers to at least 2,000-3,000. The book says add buffers > to account for 1/4 of your physical memory... that would be excessive > for most applications. > > -EEM > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Hamilton [mailto:bham@finsco.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, > 2003 2:05 PM To: malcolm.iiug; informix-list iiug Subject: Re: lock > table overflow > > After bringing the server online for about 2 hours, onstat -p shows" > ovrlocks = 12 ovrbufs = 23 bufwaits = 265372 lokreqs = 64million+ > > In onconfig: > LOCKS = 20,000> BUFFS = 200 > > Does this seem reasonable? > If not, what values would be appropriate? What other parameters should I > check? > >> Bill, >> what is onstat -p showing for ovlocks? >> > sending to informix-list > > sending to informix-list > > sending to informix-list > > sending to informix-list