Re: ER and inplace upgrade 7.31 to 9.40

Andrew Hamm wrote: > > Hi folks > > I need to upgrade 7.31 to 9.40 on servers which partake in Enterprise > Replication. We did a test server, and it barfed because of a few things: > Andrew, please specify 9.40 in more detail. You *should* upgrade to 9.40.xC5W1. We are glad to move to FC5W1 after a few weeks on FC4W4 without too many problems. But *C2 was a pita. Check the migration guide. At least this is what I remember: - rebuild of sysmaster - rebuild of sysutils - you should carefully check that no pending TX - no verisoned pages in tables (inplace alters) If you have high TX workload, then you must consider and tune: 9.40 comes with new defaults for logical log - automatic creation of addtional log log file in case of LTX - new LTX high water mark defaults Because the span which snoopy can be behind is also a percentage, this interacts. ER in 9.40 has a lot mor parallelism. One must use it. Therefore give enough space to your sbspaces, but keep in mind that caching the send Q is sort a last resort -> see that your memory Q config is appropriate for your workload Also there are new ways (and good ones) to spy around ER Queuing with onstat, to get a picture of what is going on. When TX workload has peak hours and is not constant, or if it is highish all the time one *needs* to have this data around to keep things going smooth. You definitely do *not* want to have much disk spooling if you do not put ER sbpaces onto Solid State Disks (wich is always a good idea) dic_k -- Richard Kofler SOLID STATE EDV Dienstleistungen GmbH Vienna/Austria/Europe

"Richard Kofler" <richard.kofler@chello.at> wrote in message news:416F77B0.3B81E21A@chello.at... > Andrew Hamm wrote: > > > > Hi folks > > > > I need to upgrade 7.31 to 9.40 on servers which partake in Enterprise > > Replication. We did a test server, and it barfed because of a few things: > > > > Andrew, please specify 9.40 in more detail. > > You *should* upgrade to 9.40.xC5W1. We are glad to > move to FC5W1 after a few weeks on FC4W4 without too > many problems. But *C2 was a pita. Personally I think rushing on to the latest and greatest is a bit risky. I'd like to stay a sub-release or two off the pace, and let others discover the pain (if any, obviously) ....