Daily Archives

Articles indexed Wednesday December 8 2010

Page 4/5 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >

• Oracle Linux Delivers Top CPU Benchmark Results on Sun Blades

  - by sergio.leunissen

  From the Performance and Best Practices blog: Fresh SPEC CPU2006 results for Sun Blade X6275 M2 Server Modules running Oracle Linux 5.5. The highlights: The dual-node Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module, equipped with two Intel Xeon X5670 2.93 GHz processors per node and running the Oracle Enterprise Linux 5.5 operating system delivered the best SPECint_rate2006 and SPECfp_rate2006 benchmark results for all systems with Intel Xeon processor 5000 sequence. With a SPECint_rate2006 benchmark result of 679, the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module, with two compute nodes per blade, delivers maximum performance for space constrained environments. Comparing Oracle's dual-node blade to HP's dual-node blade server, based on their single node performance, the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module SPECfp_rate2006 score of 241 outperforms the best published HP ProLiant BL2X220c G5 server score by 3.2x. A single node of a Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module using 2.93 GHz Intel Xeon X5670 processors delivered 37% improvement in SPECint_rate2006 benchmark results and 22% improvement in SPECfp_rate2006 benchmark results compared to the previous generation Sun Blade X6275 server module. Both nodes of a Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module using 2.93 GHz Intel Xeon X5670 processors delivered 59% improvement on the SPECint_rate2006 benchmark and 40% improvement on the SPECfp_rate2006 benchmark compared to the previous generation Sun Blade X6275 server module.

  Read the article

• Oracle Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel and Emulex HBA Eliminate Silent Data Corruption

  - by sergio.leunissen

  Yesterday, Emulex announced that it has added support for T10 Protection Information (T10-PI), formerly called T10-DIF, to a number of its HBAs. When used with Oracle's Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel, this will prevent silent data corruption and help ensure the integrity and regulatory compliance of user data as it is transferred from the application to the SAN From the press release: Traditionally, protecting the integrity of customers' data has been done with multiple discrete solutions, including Error Correcting Code (ECC) and Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC), but there have been coverage gaps across the I/O path from the operating system to the storage. The implementation of the T10-PI standard via Emulex's BlockGuard feature, in conjunction with other industry player's implementations, ensures that data is validated as it moves through the data path, from the application, to the HBA, to storage, enabling seamless end-to-end integrity. Read the white paper and don't miss the live webcast on eliminating silent data corruption on December 16th!

  Read the article

• eProseed (Belgium) wins the Oracle EMEA Middleware Partner of the Year Award 2010

  - by Jürgen Kress

  eProseed triple award winner of Oracle EMEA! Geoff you missed one… Thanks for the excellent work in the SOA and BPM space and your efforts in the Specialization program. Great to see the benefits of Specialization which helps eProseed to get visibility by Oracle and to become preferred by customers! For more information on the SOA Partner Community please feel free to register at www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) Blog Twitter LinkedIn Mix Forum Wiki Website Technorati Tags: eProseed,Oracle,Specialization,SOA Partner Community,SOA Community,Geoffroy de Lamalle,Jürgen Kress,OPN

  Read the article

• Oracle Expands Sun Blade Portfolio for Cloud and Highly Virtualized Environments

  - by Ferhat Hatay

  Oracle announced the expansion of Sun Blade Portfolio for cloud and highly virtualized environments that deliver powerful performance and simplified management as tightly integrated systems.  Along with the SPARC T3-1B blade server, Oracle VM blade cluster reference configuration and Oracle's optimized solution for Oracle WebLogic Suite, Oracle introduced the dual-node Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module with some impressive benchmark results.   Benchmarks on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrate the outstanding performance characteristics critical for running varied commercial applications used in cloud and highly virtualized environments.  These include best-in-class SPEC CPU2006 results with the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, six Fluent world records and 1.8 times the price-performance of the IBM Power 755 running NAMD, a prominent bio-informatics workload.   Benchmarks for Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module  SPEC CPU2006  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module demonstrated best in class SPECint_rate2006 results for all published results using the Intel Xeon processor 5600 series, with a result of 679.  This result is 97% better than the HP BL460c G7 blade, 80% better than the IBM HS22V blade, and 79% better than the Dell M710 blade.  This result demonstrates the density advantage of the new Oracle's server module for space-constrained data centers.     Sun Blade X6275M2 (2 Nodes, Intel Xeon X5670 2.93GHz) - 679 SPECint_rate2006; HP ProLiant BL460c G7 (2.93 GHz, Intel Xeon X5670) - 347 SPECint_rate2006; IBM BladeCenter HS22V (Intel Xeon X5680)  - 377 SPECint_rate2006; Dell PowerEdge M710 (Intel Xeon X5680, 3.33 GHz) - 380 SPECint_rate2006.  SPEC, SPECint, SPECfp reg tm of Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results from www.spec.org as of 11/24/2010 and this report.    For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Fluent The Sun Fire X6275 M2 server module produced world-record results on each of the six standard cases in the current "FLUENT 12" benchmark test suite at 8-, 12-, 24-, 32-, 64- and 96-core configurations. These results beat the most recent QLogic score with IBM DX 360 M series platforms and QLogic "Truescale" interconnects.  Results on sedan_4m test case on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module are 23% better than the HP C7000 system, and 20% better than the IBM DX 360 M2; Dell has not posted a result for this test case.  Results can be found at the FLUENT website.   ANSYS's FLUENT software solves fluid flow problems, and is based on a numerical technique called computational fluid dynamics (CFD), which is used in the automotive, aerospace, and consumer products industries. The FLUENT 12 benchmark test suite consists of seven models that are well suited for multi-node clustered environments and representative of modern engineering CFD clusters. Vendors benchmark their systems with the principal objective of providing comparative performance information for FLUENT software that, among other things, depends on compilers, optimization, interconnect, and the performance characteristics of the hardware.   FLUENT application performance is representative of other commercial applications that require memory and CPU resources to be available in a scalable cluster-ready format.  FLUENT benchmark has six conventional test cases (eddy_417k, turbo_500k, aircraft_2m, sedan_4m, truck_14m, truck_poly_14m) at various core counts.   All information on the FLUENT website (http://www.fluent.com) is Copyrighted1995-2010 by ANSYS Inc. Results as of November 24, 2010. For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   NAMD Results on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module running NAMD (a parallel molecular dynamics code designed for high-performance simulation of large biomolecular systems) show up to a 1.8X better price/performance than IBM's Power 7-based system.  For space-constrained environments, the ultra-dense Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module provides a 1.7X better price/performance per rack unit than IBM's system.     IBM Power 755 4-way Cluster (16U). Total price for cluster: $324,212. See IBM United States Hardware Announcement 110-008, dated February 9, 2010, pp. 4, 21 and 39-46.  Sun Blade X6275 M2 8-Blade Cluster (10U). Total price for cluster:  $193,939. Price/performance and performance/RU comparisons based on f1ATPase molecule test results. Sun Blade X6275 M2 cluster: $3,568/step/sec, 5.435 step/sec/RU. IBM Power 755 cluster: $6,355/step/sec, 3.189 step/sec/U. See http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/power/hardware/reports/system_perf.html. See http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/namd/performance.html for more information, results as of 11/24/10.   For more specifics about these results, please go to see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf   Reverse Time Migration The Reverse Time Migration is heavily used in geophysical imaging and modeling for Oil & Gas Exploration.  The Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module showed up to a 40% performance improvement over the previous generation server module with super-linear scalability to 16 nodes for the 9-Point Stencil used in this Reverse Time Migration computational kernel.  The balanced combination of Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system with the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module cluster showed linear scalability for the total application throughput, including the I/O and MPI communication, to produce a final 3-D seismic depth imaged cube for interpretation. The final image write time from the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes to Oracle's Sun Storage 7410 system achieved 10GbE line speed of 1.25 GBytes/second or better performance. Between subsequent runs, the effects of I/O buffer caching on the Sun Blade X6275 M2 server module nodes and write optimized caching on the Sun Storage 7410 system gave up to 1.8 GBytes/second effective write performance. The performance results and characterization of this Reverse Time Migration benchmark could serve as a useful measure for many other I/O intensive commercial applications. 3D VTI Reverse Time Migration Seismic Depth Imaging, see http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf/entry/3d_vti_reverse_time_migration for more information, results as of 11/14/2010.                            

  Read the article

• Mismanaged Session Cookie Issue Fixed for EBS in JRE 1.6.0_23

  - by Steven Chan

  At last:  some good news for those of you affected by the mismanaged session cookie issue in E-Business Suite environments.  This issue is resolved by the latest Sun Java Runtime Environment 1.6.0_23 (a.k.a. JRE 6u23, internal version 1.6.0_23-b05).See the 1.6.0_23 Update Release Notes for details about what has changed in this release.  This release is available for download from the usual Sun channels and through the 'Java Automatic Update' mechanism.This JRE release has been certified with both Oracle E-Business Suite Release 11i and 12.  We recommend this release for all E-Business Suite users.

  Read the article

• An XEvent a Day (8 of 31) – Targets Week – synchronous_event_counter

  - by Jonathan Kehayias

  Yesterday’s post, Targets Week - Bucketizers , looked at the bucketizer Targets in Extended Events and how they can be used to simplify analysis and perform more targeted analysis based on their output.  Today’s post will be fairly short, by comparison to the previous posts, while we look at the synchronous_event_counter target, which can be used to test the impact of an Event Session without actually incurring the cost of Event collection. What is the synchronous_event_counter? The synchronous_event_count...(read more)

  Read the article

• Session memory – who’s this guy named Max and what’s he doing with my memory?

  - by extended_events

  SQL Server MVP Jonathan Kehayias (blog) emailed me a question last week when he noticed that the total memory used by the buffers for an event session was larger than the value he specified for the MAX_MEMORY option in the CREATE EVENT SESSION DDL. The answer here seems like an excellent subject for me to kick-off my new “401 – Internals” tag that identifies posts where I pull back the curtains a bit and let you peek into what’s going on inside the extended events engine. In a previous post (Option Trading: Getting the most out of the event session options) I explained that we use a set of buffers to store the event data before  we write the event data to asynchronous targets. The MAX_MEMORY along with the MEMORY_PARTITION_MODE defines how big each buffer will be. Theoretically, that means that I can predict the size of each buffer using the following formula: max memory / # of buffers = buffer size If it was that simple I wouldn’t be writing this post. I’ll take “boundary” for 64K Alex For a number of reasons that are beyond the scope of this blog, we create event buffers in 64K chunks. The result of this is that the buffer size indicated by the formula above is rounded up to the next 64K boundary and that is the size used to create the buffers. If you think visually, this means that the graph of your max_memory option compared to the actual buffer size that results will look like a set of stairs rather than a smooth line. You can see this behavior by looking at the output of dm_xe_sessions, specifically the fields related to the buffer sizes, over a range of different memory inputs: Note: This test was run on a 2 core machine using per_cpu partitioning which results in 5 buffers. (Seem my previous post referenced above for the math behind buffer count.) input_memory_kb total_regular_buffers regular_buffer_size total_buffer_size 637 5 130867 654335 638 5 130867 654335 639 5 130867 654335 640 5 196403 982015 641 5 196403 982015 642 5 196403 982015 This is just a segment of the results that shows one of the “jumps” between the buffer boundary at 639 KB and 640 KB. You can verify the size boundary by doing the math on the regular_buffer_size field, which is returned in bytes: 196403 – 130867 = 65536 bytes 65536 / 1024 = 64 KB The relationship between the input for max_memory and when the regular_buffer_size is going to jump from one 64K boundary to the next is going to change based on the number of buffers being created. The number of buffers is dependent on the partition mode you choose. If you choose any partition mode other than NONE, the number of buffers will depend on your hardware configuration. (Again, see the earlier post referenced above.) With the default partition mode of none, you always get three buffers, regardless of machine configuration, so I generated a “range table” for max_memory settings between 1 KB and 4096 KB as an example. start_memory_range_kb end_memory_range_kb total_regular_buffers regular_buffer_size total_buffer_size 1 191 NULL NULL NULL 192 383 3 130867 392601 384 575 3 196403 589209 576 767 3 261939 785817 768 959 3 327475 982425 960 1151 3 393011 1179033 1152 1343 3 458547 1375641 1344 1535 3 524083 1572249 1536 1727 3 589619 1768857 1728 1919 3 655155 1965465 1920 2111 3 720691 2162073 2112 2303 3 786227 2358681 2304 2495 3 851763 2555289 2496 2687 3 917299 2751897 2688 2879 3 982835 2948505 2880 3071 3 1048371 3145113 3072 3263 3 1113907 3341721 3264 3455 3 1179443 3538329 3456 3647 3 1244979 3734937 3648 3839 3 1310515 3931545 3840 4031 3 1376051 4128153 4032 4096 3 1441587 4324761 As you can see, there are 21 “steps” within this range and max_memory values below 192 KB fall below the 64K per buffer limit so they generate an error when you attempt to specify them. Max approximates True as memory approaches 64K The upshot of this is that the max_memory option does not imply a contract for the maximum memory that will be used for the session buffers (Those of you who read Take it to the Max (and beyond) know that max_memory is really only referring to the event session buffer memory.) but is more of an estimate of total buffer size to the nearest higher multiple of 64K times the number of buffers you have. The maximum delta between your initial max_memory setting and the true total buffer size occurs right after you break through a 64K boundary, for example if you set max_memory = 576 KB (see the green line in the table), your actual buffer size will be closer to 767 KB in a non-partitioned event session. You get “stepped up” for every 191 KB block of initial max_memory which isn’t likely to cause a problem for most machines. Things get more interesting when you consider a partitioned event session on a computer that has a large number of logical CPUs or NUMA nodes. Since each buffer gets “stepped up” when you break a boundary, the delta can get much larger because it’s multiplied by the number of buffers. For example, a machine with 64 logical CPUs will have 160 buffers using per_cpu partitioning or if you have 8 NUMA nodes configured on that machine you would have 24 buffers when using per_node. If you’ve just broken through a 64K boundary and get “stepped up” to the next buffer size you’ll end up with total buffer size approximately 10240 KB and 1536 KB respectively (64K * # of buffers) larger than max_memory value you might think you’re getting. Using per_cpu partitioning on large machine has the most impact because of the large number of buffers created. If the amount of memory being used by your system within these ranges is important to you then this is something worth paying attention to and considering when you configure your event sessions. The DMV dm_xe_sessions is the tool to use to identify the exact buffer size for your sessions. In addition to the regular buffers (read: event session buffers) you’ll also see the details for large buffers if you have configured MAX_EVENT_SIZE. The “buffer steps” for any given hardware configuration should be static within each partition mode so if you want to have a handy reference available when you configure your event sessions you can use the following code to generate a range table similar to the one above that is applicable for your specific machine and chosen partition mode. DECLARE @buf_size_output table (input_memory_kb bigint, total_regular_buffers bigint, regular_buffer_size bigint, total_buffer_size bigint) DECLARE @buf_size int, @part_mode varchar(8) SET @buf_size = 1 -- Set to the begining of your max_memory range (KB) SET @part_mode = 'per_cpu' -- Set to the partition mode for the table you want to generate WHILE @buf_size <= 4096 -- Set to the end of your max_memory range (KB) BEGIN     BEGIN TRY         IF EXISTS (SELECT * from sys.server_event_sessions WHERE name = 'buffer_size_test')             DROP EVENT SESSION buffer_size_test ON SERVER         DECLARE @session nvarchar(max)         SET @session = 'create event session buffer_size_test on server                         add event sql_statement_completed                         add target ring_buffer                         with (max_memory = ' + CAST(@buf_size as nvarchar(4)) + ' KB, memory_partition_mode = ' + @part_mode + ')'         EXEC sp_executesql @session         SET @session = 'alter event session buffer_size_test on server                         state = start'         EXEC sp_executesql @session         INSERT @buf_size_output (input_memory_kb, total_regular_buffers, regular_buffer_size, total_buffer_size)             SELECT @buf_size, total_regular_buffers, regular_buffer_size, total_buffer_size FROM sys.dm_xe_sessions WHERE name = 'buffer_size_test'     END TRY     BEGIN CATCH         INSERT @buf_size_output (input_memory_kb)             SELECT @buf_size     END CATCH     SET @buf_size = @buf_size + 1 END DROP EVENT SESSION buffer_size_test ON SERVER SELECT MIN(input_memory_kb) start_memory_range_kb, MAX(input_memory_kb) end_memory_range_kb, total_regular_buffers, regular_buffer_size, total_buffer_size from @buf_size_output group by total_regular_buffers, regular_buffer_size, total_buffer_size Thanks to Jonathan for an interesting question and a chance to explore some of the details of Extended Event internals. - Mike

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >