filepro RAM limit

[Keith F Weatherhead]

On Fri, May 11, 2007 9:01, scooter6 said:
> No - I actually didn't omit the OS -- it's right above where you
> posted that
> I hadn't
> It's SCO OpenServer 5.0.5
>
> This Dell uses a Perc RAID controller and has 512MB L cache when it
> boots --
>
> Are you saying if this was put in a system that had a faster bus and
> faster
> RAID throughput that the results would be faster??  Just wanting to
> clarify
> what you're saying
>
> Scott

Scott,

If you are not swapping then memory is not the issue !!

Although a faster RAM bus *might* help, memory is usually still many
times faster than DISK.

The BUS to the drives, the Controller itself, the amount of RAM on
the Controller, the Drives (seek time, rotational latency, burst
ability and sustained thru-put ability) will ALL impact the
performance.

There is no such thing as TOO fast there, other than what the pocket
will allow for.  Improving any of these things will help for
Indexing and scanning of files where the CPU can only work on the
data as fast as it can be supplied from the media.

Regards,
Keith


> On 5/11/07, Fairlight <fairlite at fairlite.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 09:28:11AM -0400, scooter6, the prominent
>> pundit,
>> witicized:
>> > I have a customer who is running filepro 5.0.09R4 on a SCO
>> OpenServer
>> > 5.0.5platform --
>> >
>> > Hardware is a Dell Poweredge Server - 2.4GHz processor
>>
>> I note you omit the OS...which would be relevant to this
>> discussion in
>> some
>> circumstances.
>>
>> > Everything has been working great for about 3 yrs now -- I
>> decided to
>> > upgrade their RAM -- they only had 512MB -- so, I'm at client's
>> site --
>> > ordered 2GB from Dell and installed it last night -- everything
>> booted
>> fine
>> > and ran a couple of processes last night - including some
>> indexes - and
>> it
>> > seemed a bit faster - just not REALLY faster like I would have
>> thought
>> --
>> >
>> > During their series of night time processes that runs nightly,
>> it wasn't
>> any
>> > faster at all to complete -- still takes about an hour and a
>> half ???
>> >
>> > Anyone have any suggestions on why the filepro processes
>> wouldn't be
>> > noticably quicker to run ???
>> > Thanks
>>
>> Well, if your benchmark is rebuilding indexes and doing reports,
>> you've
>> upgraded the wrong components.  Those tasks use very little memory
>> by
>> comparison, and your main bottleneck is disk I/O speed--especially
>> on an
>> index rebuild, since that's almost all disk I/O.  Faster drives
>> and bus
>> speeds would help.
>>
>> The key is whether or not you were maxing memory usage to begin
>> with.  If
>> you weren't, then upgrading the amount of RAM is meaningless for
>> this
>> use--a waste of money.  The only way more RAM will increase speed
>> is if
>> you're going into swap before an upgrade and not needing swap
>> after it.
>> fP is a low-memory-consumption application, mostly affected by how
>> many
>> instances of its programs are running concurrently.  First place
>> to look
>> is
>> not RAM, it's hard drive throughput and performance.
>>
>> mark->
>> --
>> No matter what your problems, modern medicine can help!
>> http://members.iglou.com/fairlite/fixital/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Filepro-list mailing list
>> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>


-- 
Keith F Weatherhead              keithw at ddltd.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Discus Data, Ltd            Phone: (815) 237-8467
3465 S Carbon Hill Rd         Fax: (815) 237-8641
Braceville, IL  60407        Cell: (815) 405-9800

www.HVACmodel.COM  HVAC Equipment Capacity Search
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -