Re: [Info-Ingres] cache_sharing & dmf_tbl_cache_size

This is a discussion on Re: [Info-Ingres] cache_sharing & dmf_tbl_cache_size within the Ingres Database forums in Other Databases category; At 3:12 PM +0200 5/18/07, Jean-Pierre Zuate wrote: >Hello Ingres Community, > >We have 5 DBMS definitions, all with cache_sharing = ON > >The five dmf_tbl_cache_size are equivalent (set to 150). > >If one of the DBMS definition of dmf_tbl_cache_size is : >- below the other values : session hang, and then entire installation hang. The closed-table info cache controlled by dmf_tbl_cache_size is stored in the shared buffer cache memory (the first one, if you have multiple caches with dmf_separate ON). The hang is caused by mismatch between the addresses computed by the various servers. I guess 2.6 must still have ...

Go Back   Database Forum > Other Databases > Ingres Database

Database Forums

Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1  
Old 05-18-2007, 11:07 AM
Default Re: [Info-Ingres] cache_sharing & dmf_tbl_cache_size

At 3:12 PM +0200 5/18/07, Jean-Pierre Zuate wrote:
>Hello Ingres Community,
>
>We have 5 DBMS definitions, all with cache_sharing = ON
>
>The five dmf_tbl_cache_size are equivalent (set to 150).
>
>If one of the DBMS definition of dmf_tbl_cache_size is :
>- below the other values : session hang, and then entire installation hang.


The closed-table info cache controlled by dmf_tbl_cache_size is
stored in the shared buffer cache memory (the first one, if
you have multiple caches with dmf_separate ON).

The hang is caused by mismatch between the addresses computed
by the various servers. I guess 2.6 must still have vestiges
of the original 6.x cache-sharing code. In 6.x, because there
was no config.dat, each dbms server had its own rundbms.opt
and they had to match. With config.dat, the first server up
can set up the shared cache and the other servers can simply
attach, except that's not how the code worked until fairly
recently. In 2.6 each server is still calculating most of
the shared memory layout independently and they have to
match. I think there is SOME attempt to force whatever
cache parameters the cache was built with, but apparently
dmf_tbl_cache_size isn't one of the things that get fixed
up.

This is fixed in 9.1.0 (maybe 9.0.4, not sure) such that
servers attaching to an existing cache simply take what's
already there, and ignore all the config cache parameters.

Karl
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Integrated by bbpixel2009 :: jvbPlugin R1013.368.1

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
In an effort to better serve ads to our visitors, cookies are used on Mydatabasesupport.com. For more information, check out our Privacy Policy.