Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9

I sent this in yesterday, but I never saw it posted; nor did I receive any responses. As of this moment, one of the queries mentioned below has been running for about 18 hours now and it is still processing. Larry ________________________________ From: LARRY SORENSEN Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:04 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 Solaris 10 IDS 11.50.FC9 WorkGroup Edition I have a new server that I am testing out. I copied all the configurations from the previous server, and I loaded this server from an archive of the previous server. I seems to be running slowly even though there is nothing else running. Also, it has a lot more of all resources available than the previous server (memory, cpu, disk space, etc.) For example, I am doing the following on 2 large tables. The server is 99%-100% idle and the queries are taking hours. The tables are approximately 25-30 GB each. UPDATE table_name SET column2 = column2 WHERE 1=1; During some other testing, we have a program that usually processes 120 records per hour. On this server it processed about 30 records per hour when tested. What are some things that I can look at to speed this server up? Both servers have the same configurations in the $ONCONFIG. Both servers are running the same versions of Informix and Solaris. The new, slower server, is beefier in every way; but it seems to process slower. Larry ________________________________ From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Andreas Legner <andreas.legner@de.ibm.com> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:30 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38541] For the first question: 32MB SHMADD looking a little small compared to 2GB SHMVIRTSIZE - you might = want to increase SHMVIRTSIZE to e.g. 3GB up front (to avoid any dynamic=20 addition) plus increasing SHMADD to e.g. 0.5 or 1 GB. Depending on what=20 you can afford on your machine in terms of available memory. The sample you gave happens to be a *message* segment - I'm guessing=20 what you referring to are a number of *virtual* segments? As for the i4gl I'd not see why this needed to change, as long as the used = functionality wouldn't change, but maybe someone has to add something=20 here. Regards, Andreas From: "LARRY SORENSEN" <LSORENSEN25@msn.com> To: ids@iiug.org Date: 23.01.2017 19:44 Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38540] Sent by: ids-bounces@iiug.org No help out there on this?=20 =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=20 From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of LARRY=20 SORENSEN=20 <LSORENSEN25@msn.com>=20 Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 1:30 PM=20 To: ids@iiug.org=20 Subject: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38534]=20 Solaris 10 Sparc=20 IDS Growth Edition 11.50.FC5 -> 11.50.FC9=20 i4gl 7.32.FC3=20 I have a few questions concerning the upgrade. I have I4GL installed as=20 well.=20 I copied over everything from the 11.50.FC5 directory, which had I4GL=20 already=20 installed, and I installed 11.50.FC9 on top of it and ran ids=5Finstall.=20 First, the database came up fine, but there were several informative=20 segments=20 in the online.log that said it was requesting more shared memory. What do=20 I=20 need to change in the $ONCONFIG file to get everything I need at startup=20 without requesting more shared memory?=20 SHMBASE 0x10A000000L=20 SHMVIRTIZE 2457600=20 SHMADD 32768=20 EXTSHMADD 8192=20 SHMTOTAL 0=20 (repeated several times; 5-6 times)=20 Requested shared memory segment size rounded from 4280KB to 5120KB=20 Dynamically allocated new message shared memory segment (size 5120K)=20 Memory sizes: resident:2143232 KB, virtual:2483200 KB, SHMTOTAL:16777216=20 KB=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 Second question, I thought that someone mentioned that if I went from=20 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9, I would also have to upgrade my I4GL. Is that the=20 case, and which version do I need to go to?=20 Larry=20 ***************************************************************************= ****=20 Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 ***************************************************************************= ****=20 Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

Is the disk space on the new server set up optimally for databases? RAID 10, not RAID 5, no journaling, etc.? > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 15:23 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38550] > > I sent this in yesterday, but I never saw it posted; nor did I receive > any responses. > > As of this moment, one of the queries mentioned below has been running > for about 18 hours now and it is still processing. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:04 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 > > Solaris 10 > > IDS 11.50.FC9 WorkGroup Edition > > I have a new server that I am testing out. I copied all the > configurations from the previous server, and I loaded this server from > an archive of the previous server. I seems to be running slowly even > though there is nothing else running. Also, it has a lot more of all > resources available than the previous server (memory, cpu, disk space, > etc.) > > For example, I am doing the following on 2 large tables. The server is > 99%-100% idle and the queries are taking hours. The tables are > approximately > 25-30 GB each. > > UPDATE table_name SET column2 = column2 WHERE 1=1;> > During some other testing, we have a program that usually processes 120 > records per hour. On this server it processed about 30 records per hour > when tested. > > What are some things that I can look at to speed this server up? > > Both servers have the same configurations in the $ONCONFIG. > > Both servers are running the same versions of Informix and Solaris. > > The new, slower server, is beefier in every way; but it seems to > process slower. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Andreas > Legner <andreas.legner@de.ibm.com> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:30 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38541] > > For the first question: > > 32MB SHMADD looking a little small compared to 2GB SHMVIRTSIZE - you > might = > > want to increase SHMVIRTSIZE to e.g. 3GB up front (to avoid any > dynamic=20 > addition) plus increasing SHMADD to e.g. 0.5 or 1 GB. Depending on > what=20 you can afford on your machine in terms of available memory. > > The sample you gave happens to be a *message* segment - I'm guessing=20 > what you referring to are a number of *virtual* segments? > > As for the i4gl I'd not see why this needed to change, as long as the > used = > > functionality wouldn't change, but maybe someone has to add > something=20 here. > > Regards, > Andreas > > From: "LARRY SORENSEN" <LSORENSEN25@msn.com> > To: ids@iiug.org > Date: 23.01.2017 19:44 > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38540] Sent by: > ids-bounces@iiug.org > > No help out there on this?=20 > > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5 > F=5F= > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=20 > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of LARRY=20 > SORENSEN=20 > <LSORENSEN25@msn.com>=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 1:30 PM=20 > To: ids@iiug.org=20 > Subject: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38534]=20 > > Solaris 10 Sparc=20 > > IDS Growth Edition 11.50.FC5 -> 11.50.FC9=20 > > i4gl 7.32.FC3=20 > > I have a few questions concerning the upgrade. I have I4GL installed > as=20 > well.=20 > I copied over everything from the 11.50.FC5 directory, which had > I4GL=20 > already=20 > installed, and I installed 11.50.FC9 on top of it and ran > ids=5Finstall.=20 > > First, the database came up fine, but there were several informative=20 > segments=20 > in the online.log that said it was requesting more shared memory. What > do=20 > I=20 > need to change in the $ONCONFIG file to get everything I need at > startup=20 without requesting more shared memory?=20 > > SHMBASE 0x10A000000L=20> > SHMVIRTIZE 2457600=20 > > SHMADD 32768=20 > > EXTSHMADD 8192=20 > > SHMTOTAL 0=20> > (repeated several times; 5-6 times)=20 > > Requested shared memory segment size rounded from 4280KB to 5120KB=20 > > Dynamically allocated new message shared memory segment (size 5120K)=20 > > Memory sizes: resident:2143232 KB, virtual:2483200 KB, > SHMTOTAL:16777216=20 > KB=20 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 > > Second question, I thought that someone mentioned that if I went > from=20 > 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9, I would also have to upgrade my I4GL. Is that > the=20 case, and which version do I need to go to?=20 > > Larry=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

It is set up exactly the same as the server the data archive came from. It is on RAID 5, only because the external disk array, array manager, had a limited selection of possible RAID configurations. RAID 10 is not one of them. I did choose the disk array. I just had to make things work within the limitations. Larry ________________________________ From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Everett Mills <Everett.Mills@nationalbeef.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:46 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: RE: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38551] Is the disk space on the new server set up optimally for databases? RAID 10, not RAID 5, no journaling, etc.? > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 15:23 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38550] > > I sent this in yesterday, but I never saw it posted; nor did I receive > any responses. > > As of this moment, one of the queries mentioned below has been running > for about 18 hours now and it is still processing. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:04 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 > > Solaris 10 > > IDS 11.50.FC9 WorkGroup Edition > > I have a new server that I am testing out. I copied all the > configurations from the previous server, and I loaded this server from > an archive of the previous server. I seems to be running slowly even > though there is nothing else running. Also, it has a lot more of all > resources available than the previous server (memory, cpu, disk space, > etc.) > > For example, I am doing the following on 2 large tables. The server is > 99%-100% idle and the queries are taking hours. The tables are > approximately > 25-30 GB each. > > UPDATE table_name SET column2 = column2 WHERE 1=1;> > During some other testing, we have a program that usually processes 120 > records per hour. On this server it processed about 30 records per hour > when tested. > > What are some things that I can look at to speed this server up? > > Both servers have the same configurations in the $ONCONFIG. > > Both servers are running the same versions of Informix and Solaris. > > The new, slower server, is beefier in every way; but it seems to > process slower. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Andreas > Legner <andreas.legner@de.ibm.com> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:30 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38541] > > For the first question: > > 32MB SHMADD looking a little small compared to 2GB SHMVIRTSIZE - you > might = > > want to increase SHMVIRTSIZE to e.g. 3GB up front (to avoid any > dynamic=20 > addition) plus increasing SHMADD to e.g. 0.5 or 1 GB. Depending on > what=20 you can afford on your machine in terms of available memory. > > The sample you gave happens to be a *message* segment - I'm guessing=20 > what you referring to are a number of *virtual* segments? > > As for the i4gl I'd not see why this needed to change, as long as the > used = > > functionality wouldn't change, but maybe someone has to add > something=20 here. > > Regards, > Andreas > > From: "LARRY SORENSEN" <LSORENSEN25@msn.com> > To: ids@iiug.org > Date: 23.01.2017 19:44 > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38540] Sent by: > ids-bounces@iiug.org > > No help out there on this?=20 > > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5 > F=5F= > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=20 > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of LARRY=20 > SORENSEN=20 > <LSORENSEN25@msn.com>=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 1:30 PM=20 > To: ids@iiug.org=20 > Subject: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38534]=20 > > Solaris 10 Sparc=20 > > IDS Growth Edition 11.50.FC5 -> 11.50.FC9=20 > > i4gl 7.32.FC3=20 > > I have a few questions concerning the upgrade. I have I4GL installed > as=20 > well.=20 > I copied over everything from the 11.50.FC5 directory, which had > I4GL=20 > already=20 > installed, and I installed 11.50.FC9 on top of it and ran > ids=5Finstall.=20 > > First, the database came up fine, but there were several informative=20 > segments=20 > in the online.log that said it was requesting more shared memory. What > do=20 > I=20 > need to change in the $ONCONFIG file to get everything I need at > startup=20 without requesting more shared memory?=20 > > SHMBASE 0x10A000000L=20> > SHMVIRTIZE 2457600=20 > > SHMADD 32768=20 > > EXTSHMADD 8192=20 > > SHMTOTAL 0=20> > (repeated several times; 5-6 times)=20 > > Requested shared memory segment size rounded from 4280KB to 5120KB=20 > > Dynamically allocated new message shared memory segment (size 5120K)=20 > > Memory sizes: resident:2143232 KB, virtual:2483200 KB, > SHMTOTAL:16777216=20 > KB=20 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 > > Second question, I thought that someone mentioned that if I went > from=20 > 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9, I would also have to upgrade my I4GL. Is that > the=20 case, and which version do I need to go to?=20 > > Larry=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

And there is tons of extra disk space. Larry ________________________________ From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Everett Mills <Everett.Mills@nationalbeef.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:46 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: RE: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38551] Is the disk space on the new server set up optimally for databases? RAID 10, not RAID 5, no journaling, etc.? > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 15:23 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38550] > > I sent this in yesterday, but I never saw it posted; nor did I receive > any responses. > > As of this moment, one of the queries mentioned below has been running > for about 18 hours now and it is still processing. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:04 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 > > Solaris 10 > > IDS 11.50.FC9 WorkGroup Edition > > I have a new server that I am testing out. I copied all the > configurations from the previous server, and I loaded this server from > an archive of the previous server. I seems to be running slowly even > though there is nothing else running. Also, it has a lot more of all > resources available than the previous server (memory, cpu, disk space, > etc.) > > For example, I am doing the following on 2 large tables. The server is > 99%-100% idle and the queries are taking hours. The tables are > approximately > 25-30 GB each. > > UPDATE table_name SET column2 = column2 WHERE 1=1;> > During some other testing, we have a program that usually processes 120 > records per hour. On this server it processed about 30 records per hour > when tested. > > What are some things that I can look at to speed this server up? > > Both servers have the same configurations in the $ONCONFIG. > > Both servers are running the same versions of Informix and Solaris. > > The new, slower server, is beefier in every way; but it seems to > process slower. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Andreas > Legner <andreas.legner@de.ibm.com> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:30 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38541] > > For the first question: > > 32MB SHMADD looking a little small compared to 2GB SHMVIRTSIZE - you > might = > > want to increase SHMVIRTSIZE to e.g. 3GB up front (to avoid any > dynamic=20 > addition) plus increasing SHMADD to e.g. 0.5 or 1 GB. Depending on > what=20 you can afford on your machine in terms of available memory. > > The sample you gave happens to be a *message* segment - I'm guessing=20 > what you referring to are a number of *virtual* segments? > > As for the i4gl I'd not see why this needed to change, as long as the > used = > > functionality wouldn't change, but maybe someone has to add > something=20 here. > > Regards, > Andreas > > From: "LARRY SORENSEN" <LSORENSEN25@msn.com> > To: ids@iiug.org > Date: 23.01.2017 19:44 > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38540] Sent by: > ids-bounces@iiug.org > > No help out there on this?=20 > > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5 > F=5F= > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=20 > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of LARRY=20 > SORENSEN=20 > <LSORENSEN25@msn.com>=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 1:30 PM=20 > To: ids@iiug.org=20 > Subject: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38534]=20 > > Solaris 10 Sparc=20 > > IDS Growth Edition 11.50.FC5 -> 11.50.FC9=20 > > i4gl 7.32.FC3=20 > > I have a few questions concerning the upgrade. I have I4GL installed > as=20 > well.=20 > I copied over everything from the 11.50.FC5 directory, which had > I4GL=20 > already=20 > installed, and I installed 11.50.FC9 on top of it and ran > ids=5Finstall.=20 > > First, the database came up fine, but there were several informative=20 > segments=20 > in the online.log that said it was requesting more shared memory. What > do=20 > I=20 > need to change in the $ONCONFIG file to get everything I need at > startup=20 without requesting more shared memory?=20 > > SHMBASE 0x10A000000L=20> > SHMVIRTIZE 2457600=20 > > SHMADD 32768=20 > > EXTSHMADD 8192=20 > > SHMTOTAL 0=20> > (repeated several times; 5-6 times)=20 > > Requested shared memory segment size rounded from 4280KB to 5120KB=20 > > Dynamically allocated new message shared memory segment (size 5120K)=20 > > Memory sizes: resident:2143232 KB, virtual:2483200 KB, > SHMTOTAL:16777216=20 > KB=20 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 > > Second question, I thought that someone mentioned that if I went > from=20 > 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9, I would also have to upgrade my I4GL. Is that > the=20 case, and which version do I need to go to?=20 > > Larry=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

If I were working this issue, I'd first find out which thread was doing the update query. Then I would run "onstat -g stk <thread_id> on that thread multiple times. If I saw a common pattern, then I would ask this forum if there was any indication what might be going on based on the thread's stack. Madison Pruet Retired and Loving it On Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:31 PM, LARRY SORENSEN <LSORENSEN25@msn.com> wrote: And there is tons of extra disk space. Larry ________________________________ From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Everett Mills <Everett.Mills@nationalbeef.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:46 PM To: ids@iiug.org Subject: RE: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38551] Is the disk space on the new server set up optimally for databases? RAID 10, not RAID 5, no journaling, etc.? > -----Original Message----- > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of > LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 15:23 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 [38550] > > I sent this in yesterday, but I never saw it posted; nor did I receive > any responses. > > As of this moment, one of the queries mentioned below has been running > for about 18 hours now and it is still processing. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: LARRY SORENSEN > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:04 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Slow table update on new server 11.50.FC9 > > Solaris 10 > > IDS 11.50.FC9 WorkGroup Edition > > I have a new server that I am testing out. I copied all the > configurations from the previous server, and I loaded this server from > an archive of the previous server. I seems to be running slowly even > though there is nothing else running. Also, it has a lot more of all > resources available than the previous server (memory, cpu, disk space, > etc.) > > For example, I am doing the following on 2 large tables. The server is > 99%-100% idle and the queries are taking hours. The tables are > approximately > 25-30 GB each. > > UPDATE table_name SET column2 = column2 WHERE 1=1;> > During some other testing, we have a program that usually processes 120 > records per hour. On this server it processed about 30 records per hour > when tested. > > What are some things that I can look at to speed this server up? > > Both servers have the same configurations in the $ONCONFIG. > > Both servers are running the same versions of Informix and Solaris. > > The new, slower server, is beefier in every way; but it seems to > process slower. > > Larry > > ________________________________ > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of Andreas > Legner <andreas.legner@de.ibm.com> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:30 PM > To: ids@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38541] > > For the first question: > > 32MB SHMADD looking a little small compared to 2GB SHMVIRTSIZE - you > might = > > want to increase SHMVIRTSIZE to e.g. 3GB up front (to avoid any > dynamic=20 > addition) plus increasing SHMADD to e.g. 0.5 or 1 GB. Depending on > what=20 you can afford on your machine in terms of available memory. > > The sample you gave happens to be a *message* segment - I'm guessing=20 > what you referring to are a number of *virtual* segments? > > As for the i4gl I'd not see why this needed to change, as long as the > used = > > functionality wouldn't change, but maybe someone has to add > something=20 here. > > Regards, > Andreas > > From: "LARRY SORENSEN" <LSORENSEN25@msn.com> > To: ids@iiug.org > Date: 23.01.2017 19:44 > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38540] Sent by: > ids-bounces@iiug.org > > No help out there on this?=20 > > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5 > F=5F= > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=20 > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org <ids-bounces@iiug.org> on behalf of LARRY=20 > SORENSEN=20 > <LSORENSEN25@msn.com>=20 > Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 1:30 PM=20 > To: ids@iiug.org=20 > Subject: Upgrading from 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9 [38534]=20 > > Solaris 10 Sparc=20 > > IDS Growth Edition 11.50.FC5 -> 11.50.FC9=20 > > i4gl 7.32.FC3=20 > > I have a few questions concerning the upgrade. I have I4GL installed > as=20 > well.=20 > I copied over everything from the 11.50.FC5 directory, which had > I4GL=20 > already=20 > installed, and I installed 11.50.FC9 on top of it and ran > ids=5Finstall.=20 > > First, the database came up fine, but there were several informative=20 > segments=20 > in the online.log that said it was requesting more shared memory. What > do=20 > I=20 > need to change in the $ONCONFIG file to get everything I need at > startup=20 without requesting more shared memory?=20 > > SHMBASE 0x10A000000L=20> > SHMVIRTIZE 2457600=20 > > SHMADD 32768=20 > > EXTSHMADD 8192=20 > > SHMTOTAL 0=20> > (repeated several times; 5-6 times)=20 > > Requested shared memory segment size rounded from 4280KB to 5120KB=20 > > Dynamically allocated new message shared memory segment (size 5120K)=20 > > Memory sizes: resident:2143232 KB, virtual:2483200 KB, > SHMTOTAL:16777216=20 > KB=20 > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 > > Second question, I thought that someone mentioned that if I went > from=20 > 11.50.FC5 to 11.50.FC9, I would also have to upgrade my I4GL. Is that > the=20 case, and which version do I need to go to?=20 > > Larry=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > *********************************************************************** > ****= > ****=20 > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.=20 > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > > *********************************************************************** > ******** > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.