Oninit cdi / Archive
Talk to an expert →

SHMBASE parameter (IDS 7.31/Linux)

Posted in 2004

Topics: Server Administration, Versions, Editions & End-of-Life

Richard Spitz — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

Dear Informixers, I've been running IDS WE 7.31UD5 (3 instances) on a SuSE 7.2 Linux system (Kernel 2.4.18-64GB-SMP) with 1GB physical memory without problems for several years. The current configuration has been running for a year. During a review of my ONCONFIG parameters, I just discovered that SHMBASE is not set according to the release notes on all of my instances. Instead of the standard 0x10000000L, it is set to 0x20000000 (note the absence of the "L"). Unfortunately and most embarrassingly for me, I could find no documentation of why and when I made this change. Since everything is running smoothly, I am not too worried. Or should I be? Should I reset the parameter to the standard? Regards, Richard -- +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | Dr. med Richard Spitz | Tel : +49-89-7095-6110 | | Klinik f'r Anaesthesiologie | FAX : +49-89-7095-6420 | | Klinikum der Univ. M'nchen | Page: +49-89-7095-789-2116 | | 81366 M'nchen, Germany | | +-------------------------------+-------------------------------+

↪ replying to Richard Spitz
Art S. Kagel — — source: Usenet: comp.databases.informix

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 05:14:54 -0500, Richard Spitz wrote: It's fine. SHMBASE is the initial attach address for shared memory within the engine. Higher is USUALLY OK and if it were going to cause a problem it would have already. Art S. Kagel > Dear Informixers, > > I've been running IDS WE 7.31UD5 (3 instances) on a SuSE 7.2 Linux system > (Kernel 2.4.18-64GB-SMP) with 1GB physical memory without problems for > several years. The current configuration has been running for a year. > > During a review of my ONCONFIG parameters, I just discovered that SHMBASE is > not set according to the release notes on all of my instances. Instead of > the standard 0x10000000L, it is set to 0x20000000 (note the absence of the > "L"). Unfortunately and most embarrassingly for me, I could find no > documentation of why and when I made this change. > > Since everything is running smoothly, I am not too worried. Or should I be? > Should I reset the parameter to the standard? > > Regards, Richard >

Glossary