Re: Disappointing test results from 9.40

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:56:35 -0500, "Rich Campbell" <rich.campbell@att.com> wrote: >Neil, > >I see the same. > >We are using 9.40 FC2 for Solaris 2.8. > >A bug has been opened for my case: > >Index builds taking 50-300 % longer then in 7.31 regardless of amount of PDQ >resources allocated. Slowness shows up with larger tables. In our case >150-800 mill rows. > >Support says that the engine is erroneously writing empty pages to the >physical log when building the index. A fix is slated. >onstat -D will confirm this behavior for 9.40 FC. You will not see this in >7.31.> >I also see slowness (~50 %) with onpload for large tables with same symptom. > >Rich > Does this bug only affect 64-bit on Solaris??

I don't know! "John Carlson" <john_carlson@whsmithusa.com> wrote in message news:1u2ssvc8jrk603m1ab58cs16lfim4u9e4j@4ax.com... > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:56:35 -0500, "Rich Campbell" > <rich.campbell@att.com> wrote: > > >Neil, > > > >I see the same. > > > >We are using 9.40 FC2 for Solaris 2.8. > > > >A bug has been opened for my case: > > > >Index builds taking 50-300 % longer then in 7.31 regardless of amount of PDQ > >resources allocated. Slowness shows up with larger tables. In our case > >150-800 mill rows. > > > >Support says that the engine is erroneously writing empty pages to the > >physical log when building the index. A fix is slated. > >onstat -D will confirm this behavior for 9.40 FC. You will not see thisin > >7.31. > > > >I also see slowness (~50 %) with onpload for large tables with same symptom. > > > >Rich > > > > Does this bug only affect 64-bit on Solaris??