This discussion is archived
1 2 Previous Next 25 Replies Latest reply: Feb 26, 2013 9:12 AM by jgarry Go to original post RSS
  • 15. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    Girish Sharma Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    Will these activity cause performance degradation due to constant checking of the background process which server to connect?
    No not constantly, the checking will happen on just client request to connect time. And of course yes, because when listener has to do some kind of checking then it will require some time and server resource too, but overall it increase the connection performance.
    Does this mean that host1,host2,host3,host4 can failover to anyone?
    Yes. Because what failover says :
    When you set the parameter to on, yes, or true, Oracle Net, at connect time, fails over to a different address if the first protocol address fails.
    http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B13789_01/network.101/b10776/tnsnames.htm#i497813

    Regards
    Girish Sharma
  • 16. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    yxes2013 Newbie
    Currently Being Moderated
    Thanks :)

    So I can make all the ports 1521 right? and not use 1630 or other ones.
  • 17. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    Girish Sharma Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    So I can make all the ports 1521 right? and not use 1630 or other ones.
    Yes no need, moreover port 1521 is default one which is recommended and don't use non-default ports until and unless required.

    Regards
    Girish Sharma
  • 18. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    Hemant K Chitale Oracle ACE
    Currently Being Moderated
    Before you rush to "follow the standard" .... I suggest you wait. The way the 1630 and 1521 have been defined imakes me think that there was a specific reason for 1630. There may be other scripts / processes / services that rely on or use 1630.

    Hemant K Chitale
  • 19. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    yxes2013 Newbie
    Currently Being Moderated
    Nope I just copied that from the docs :D as sample.

    So....multi-threaded is another name or synonymous to connection pooling? right?
  • 20. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    EdStevens Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    yxes2013 wrote:
    Hi all,

    SLES 11
    Oracle 10.2.0.4

    We have 1000+ POS machines connecting to a central database from 8am-6pm. All the machines is just doing "insert" 1 row.
    Certainly doesn't sound like the same business you mention in [url https://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=2503392&tstart=0]this thread
    What is the advantage of making its tns multi-threaded against dedicated? Assuming that I got lots of memory like 12Gb.


    Thanks a lot,

    zxy

    Edited by: yxes2013 on 24.2.2013 19:40 **** addling OS or DB version :)
  • 21. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    JohnWatson Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    yxes2013 wrote:
    Thanks :)

    So I can make all the ports 1521 right? and not use 1630 or other ones.
    Step back a bit! You appear to be using two Connection Managers, one running on host1 and the other on host3. Your sessions will (on average) be distributed with half going to each CM. Then the CM on host 1 will make onward conentions to a database instance on host 2, while your CM on host3 is making onward connections to host4. this is actually quite a complex networking environment, it is not simple load balancing.

    As for changing from dedicated server to shared server, well, at 500 sessions per instance, I would certainly consider it. But it depends on how well your operating system is handling all the context switching between server processes, it might not be necessary.

    Hope this helps.
    --
    John Watson
    Oracle Certified Master DBA
    http://skillbuilders.com
  • 22. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    tmbeetz Explorer
    Currently Being Moderated
    Hi,

    if you have SE, you have RAC. If you have EE, you have dataguard. So i'm not sure, that you are really cheaper.

    Best Regards
    Thomas
  • 23. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    jgarry Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    MTS is for scaling, not performance. It starts becoming about performance when the number of concurrent connections uses so much more memory that memory management becomes the deciding factor. Use of hugepages also impacts that.

    If you use MTS with transactions that are anything but very short you will run into problems with busy circuits. Since you say each will only insert a row, you may be ok, but still, dedicated tends to have better performance. MTS is for scaling memory limited situations.
  • 24. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    JohnWatson Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    jgarry wrote:
    MTS is for scaling, not performance. It starts becoming about performance when the number of concurrent connections uses so much more memory that memory management becomes the deciding factor. Use of hugepages also impacts that.

    If you use MTS with transactions that are anything but very short you will run into problems with busy circuits. Since you say each will only insert a row, you may be ok, but still, dedicated tends to have better performance. MTS is for scaling memory limited situations.
    Are you sure about memory savings? I have never been certain of any, and I can't see why there would be any. OK, a large chunk of PGA gets relocated to large pool, but I wouldn't have thought there would much reduction. The benefits I've see are in the system CPU usage, as Unix no longer has to context switch between zillions of processes.
  • 25. Re: Multi-threaded or Dedicated TNS
    jgarry Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
    I'm not sure about anything, test! ;-)

    But I suspect you will see that sharing a few processes among multiple logins will use less memory than all those logins using dedicated processes. At least, that was the theory back in the 90's. Maybe with all the variants of concentrators and login/logout type queries and the other configurations mentioned in this thread the number of queues to maintain would approach the number of dedicated processes. I dunno, all my experience has been throwing out mts and sizing memory properly for performance on unix boxes, others may have different experience.
1 2 Previous Next

Legend

  • Correct Answers - 10 points
  • Helpful Answers - 5 points