Nick
2011-11-10 20:52:49 UTC
Hello,
Does anyone have experience with RSS and the DELAY_APPLY feature?
I am running tests, with the end goal to find the best HDR or RSS
setup that will minimize the performance impact on my primary db
server. That is, I want the best possible performing primary for my
OLTP environment. I don't care if the secondary lags behind a little.
The secondary is at a remote location with a dedicated T3 between the
sites for this purpose.
But I am finding that RSS with DELAY_APPLY=2H (or any value that I
have tried), the primary server updates/inserts are severely
impacted. Why would this be the case? I thought the goal of RSS was
to just shoot the log records off, and let them be applied at will on
the secondary, with the primary not caring if/when they are received.
My tests are also showing that HDR yields faster primary performance
than RSS, which further confounds me.
Here is my simple test: drop test table, create test table, revoke
privs, lock table exclusively, load from file insert into... (1mil
rows), then index.
This takes on average (I have run it multiple times to get good
averages):
2.0min - no replication
2.5min - HDR replication
3.0min - RSS replication with DELAY_APPLY=0
14.0min - RSS replication with DELAY_APPLY=2H
Here is my setup:
IDS 11.50.FC7 on Sun Solaris 10, Intel processor 64bit
LOGBUFF 64
DRAUTO 0
DRINTERVAL 30
DRTIMEOUT 30
DRIDXAUTO 0
LOG_INDEX_BUILDS 1
UPDATABLE_SECONDARY 0
TEMPTAB_NOLOG 0
DELAY_APPLY 2H # This is the only value that I have tweaked in
this test
STOP_APPLY 0
LOG_STAGING_DIR /u08/ifxdb2t/logs
RSS_FLOW_CONTROL -1
Any help or observation would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Nick
Does anyone have experience with RSS and the DELAY_APPLY feature?
I am running tests, with the end goal to find the best HDR or RSS
setup that will minimize the performance impact on my primary db
server. That is, I want the best possible performing primary for my
OLTP environment. I don't care if the secondary lags behind a little.
The secondary is at a remote location with a dedicated T3 between the
sites for this purpose.
But I am finding that RSS with DELAY_APPLY=2H (or any value that I
have tried), the primary server updates/inserts are severely
impacted. Why would this be the case? I thought the goal of RSS was
to just shoot the log records off, and let them be applied at will on
the secondary, with the primary not caring if/when they are received.
My tests are also showing that HDR yields faster primary performance
than RSS, which further confounds me.
Here is my simple test: drop test table, create test table, revoke
privs, lock table exclusively, load from file insert into... (1mil
rows), then index.
This takes on average (I have run it multiple times to get good
averages):
2.0min - no replication
2.5min - HDR replication
3.0min - RSS replication with DELAY_APPLY=0
14.0min - RSS replication with DELAY_APPLY=2H
Here is my setup:
IDS 11.50.FC7 on Sun Solaris 10, Intel processor 64bit
LOGBUFF 64
DRAUTO 0
DRINTERVAL 30
DRTIMEOUT 30
DRIDXAUTO 0
LOG_INDEX_BUILDS 1
UPDATABLE_SECONDARY 0
TEMPTAB_NOLOG 0
DELAY_APPLY 2H # This is the only value that I have tweaked in
this test
STOP_APPLY 0
LOG_STAGING_DIR /u08/ifxdb2t/logs
RSS_FLOW_CONTROL -1
Any help or observation would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Nick