Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

Filesystem versus Raw

4 posts in Performance and Tuning Last posting was on 2007-09-05 03:01:39.0Z
Richard Kinread Posted on 2007-08-27 10:37:09.0Z
From: "Richard Kinread" <rkinread1@sympatico.ca>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning
Subject: Filesystem versus Raw
Lines: 22
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
NNTP-Posting-Host: bas16-toronto12-1088899027.dsl.bell.ca
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: bas16-toronto12-1088899027.dsl.bell.ca
Message-ID: <46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Aug 2007 03:37:09 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1188211029 64.231.71.211 (27 Aug 2007 03:37:09 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Aug 2007 03:37:09 -0700, bas16-toronto12-1088899027.dsl.bell.ca
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning:10327
Article PK: 88964

We are running ASE 12.5.4 ESD # 5 Solaris 64-bit and are considering moving
from raw devices to file systems using a SAN.

I have always used raw and am wondering about the perfomance impacts.

If using file systems, don't you (or at least the storage administrator)
lose the ability to place log and data segments or would you use separate
file systems for different classes of data.

It there an easy way to run a performance benchmark.

Some people from Sybase have said that we should stay on raw devices but
there are skeptics on our team. There is a new feature in ASE 15 (direct
I/O(?)) that gives better performance than on 12.5.4.

I would just like us to make the correct choice.

Thx

Richard Kinread


Germano Silva Posted on 2007-08-27 20:16:09.0Z
Reply-To: "Germano Silva" <Germano_Silva@Brown.edu>
From: "Germano Silva" <Germano_Silva@Brown.edu>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning
References: <46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub>
Subject: Re: Filesystem versus Raw
Lines: 45
Organization: Brown University
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.148.242.11
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.148.242.11
Message-ID: <46d33109@forums-1-dub>
Date: 27 Aug 2007 13:16:09 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1188245769 128.148.242.11 (27 Aug 2007 13:16:09 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 27 Aug 2007 13:16:09 -0700, 128.148.242.11
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning:10329
Article PK: 88966

Hi,

I'm in the same boat as you. I am in the process of migrating my ASE to a
new server that will be connected to a SAN and my first attempt will in
fact be trying to use the filesystem. I did create several filesystems
(data, logs, tempdb, backups) that are all on different drives and some even
in different controllers (data, logs). My plan is to first set this up on a
filesystem, load my production database into it and do a lot of testing to
see how it comnpares against my current environment. It performance is good,
I'll keep it otherwise I will redo everything using raw devices and test
again. If it does not work, at least it will be a good learning experience,
but I'm hoping that it will.

I already have my development and test environment setup this way and it
seems to be working fairly well.

Germano

"Richard Kinread" <rkinread1@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub...
> We are running ASE 12.5.4 ESD # 5 Solaris 64-bit and are considering
> moving
> from raw devices to file systems using a SAN.
>
> I have always used raw and am wondering about the perfomance impacts.
>
> If using file systems, don't you (or at least the storage administrator)
> lose the ability to place log and data segments or would you use separate
> file systems for different classes of data.
>
> It there an easy way to run a performance benchmark.
>
> Some people from Sybase have said that we should stay on raw devices but
> there are skeptics on our team. There is a new feature in ASE 15 (direct
> I/O(?)) that gives better performance than on 12.5.4.
>
> I would just like us to make the correct choice.
>
> Thx
>
> Richard Kinread
>
>


dbMethods Posted on 2007-09-05 03:00:31.0Z
Message-ID: <46DE1BD1.7040304@nospam.com>
From: dbmethods <dbmethods@nospam.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning
To: Germano Silva <Germano_Silva@Brown.edu>
Subject: Re: Filesystem versus Raw
References: <46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub> <46d33109@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <46d33109@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-457da0df.dyn.optonline.net
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-457da0df.dyn.optonline.net
Date: 4 Sep 2007 20:00:31 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1188961231 69.125.160.223 (4 Sep 2007 20:00:31 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 4 Sep 2007 20:00:31 -0700, ool-457da0df.dyn.optonline.net
Lines: 56
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning:10330
Article PK: 88967


Germano Silva wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm in the same boat as you. I am in the process of migrating my ASE to a
> new server that will be connected to a SAN and my first attempt will in
> fact be trying to use the filesystem. I did create several filesystems
> (data, logs, tempdb, backups) that are all on different drives and some even
> in different controllers (data, logs). My plan is to first set this up on a
> filesystem, load my production database into it and do a lot of testing to
> see how it comnpares against my current environment. It performance is good,
> I'll keep it otherwise I will redo everything using raw devices and test
> again. If it does not work, at least it will be a good learning experience,
> but I'm hoping that it will.
>
> I already have my development and test environment setup this way and it
> seems to be working fairly well.
>
> Germano
>
> "Richard Kinread" <rkinread1@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub...
>> We are running ASE 12.5.4 ESD # 5 Solaris 64-bit and are considering
>> moving
>> from raw devices to file systems using a SAN.
>>
>> I have always used raw and am wondering about the perfomance impacts.
>>
>> If using file systems, don't you (or at least the storage administrator)
>> lose the ability to place log and data segments or would you use separate
>> file systems for different classes of data.
>>
>> It there an easy way to run a performance benchmark.
>>
>> Some people from Sybase have said that we should stay on raw devices but
>> there are skeptics on our team. There is a new feature in ASE 15 (direct
>> I/O(?)) that gives better performance than on 12.5.4.
>>
>> I would just like us to make the correct choice.
>>
>> Thx
>>
>> Richard Kinread
>>
>>
>
>

On Solaris 10, backup FS can be ZFS, tempdb devices are UNIX FS.
Veritas LVM probably will slow down for 2-5%, but not much.
Separate data and log, which has more benefit on recovery purpose, my
take on performance could be plus minus 5% either way.

I do not have time for throughly benchmarking for raw or FS.
But for safely (legacy) reason, I won't consider FS for user data.
10% does not buy you much, there are so many things you can tune to get
50% or more from bad SQL (cursoring, lousy Java type SQL coding).


dbMethods Posted on 2007-09-05 03:01:39.0Z
From: dbmethods <dbmethods@nospam.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning
Subject: Re: Filesystem versus Raw
References: <46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub> <46d33109@forums-1-dub>
In-Reply-To: <46d33109@forums-1-dub>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-457da0df.dyn.optonline.net
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: ool-457da0df.dyn.optonline.net
Message-ID: <46de1c13$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 4 Sep 2007 20:01:39 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1188961299 69.125.160.223 (4 Sep 2007 20:01:39 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 4 Sep 2007 20:01:39 -0700, ool-457da0df.dyn.optonline.net
Lines: 56
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.performance+tuning:10331
Article PK: 88969


Germano Silva wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm in the same boat as you. I am in the process of migrating my ASE to a
> new server that will be connected to a SAN and my first attempt will in
> fact be trying to use the filesystem. I did create several filesystems
> (data, logs, tempdb, backups) that are all on different drives and some even
> in different controllers (data, logs). My plan is to first set this up on a
> filesystem, load my production database into it and do a lot of testing to
> see how it comnpares against my current environment. It performance is good,
> I'll keep it otherwise I will redo everything using raw devices and test
> again. If it does not work, at least it will be a good learning experience,
> but I'm hoping that it will.
>
> I already have my development and test environment setup this way and it
> seems to be working fairly well.
>
> Germano
>
> "Richard Kinread" <rkinread1@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:46d2a955$1@forums-1-dub...
>> We are running ASE 12.5.4 ESD # 5 Solaris 64-bit and are considering
>> moving
>> from raw devices to file systems using a SAN.
>>
>> I have always used raw and am wondering about the perfomance impacts.
>>
>> If using file systems, don't you (or at least the storage administrator)
>> lose the ability to place log and data segments or would you use separate
>> file systems for different classes of data.
>>
>> It there an easy way to run a performance benchmark.
>>
>> Some people from Sybase have said that we should stay on raw devices but
>> there are skeptics on our team. There is a new feature in ASE 15 (direct
>> I/O(?)) that gives better performance than on 12.5.4.
>>
>> I would just like us to make the correct choice.
>>
>> Thx
>>
>> Richard Kinread
>>
>>
>
>

On Solaris 10, backup FS can be ZFS, tempdb devices are UNIX FS.
Veritas LVM probably will slow down for 2-5%, but not much.
Separate data and log, which has more benefit on recovery purpose, my
take on performance could be plus minus 5% either way.

I do not have time for throughly benchmarking for raw or FS.
But for safely (legacy) reason, I won't consider FS for user data.
10% does not buy you much, there are so many things you can tune to get
50% or more from bad SQL (cursoring, lousy Java type SQL coding).