Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 73278 invoked from network); 11 Aug 2006 14:44:57 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Aug 2006 14:44:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 92752 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2006 14:44:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 92721 invoked by uid 500); 11 Aug 2006 14:44:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 92712 invoked by uid 99); 11 Aug 2006 14:44:55 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:44:55 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [32.97.182.143] (HELO e3.ny.us.ibm.com) (32.97.182.143) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:44:54 -0700 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e3.ny.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7BEiWxH013125 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:44:32 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.6/NCO/VER7.0) with ESMTP id k7BEiW3d291944 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:44:32 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k7BEiWqq014544 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:44:32 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (sig-9-65-27-187.mts.ibm.com [9.65.27.187]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k7BEiTj1014428 for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:44:31 -0400 Message-ID: <44DC97CC.7010008@sbcglobal.net> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:44:28 -0700 From: Mike Matrigali Reply-To: mikem_app@sbcglobal.net User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: Re: [jira] Assigned: (DERBY-1664) Derby startup time is too slow References: <21233852.1155248954791.JavaMail.jira@brutus> <44DBC695.1060303@sbcglobal.net> <44DBCB1D.6060103@sun.com> In-Reply-To: <44DBCB1D.6060103@sun.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N David Van Couvering wrote: > Hi, Mike. Thanks for wanting to participate. My first step I was > planning to do was to do some measurements, as you suggested. > > I was going to start with my own machine, which is a laptop running > Solaris x86. But I suspect a lot of folks care about XP and Linux. I > can create a test and we can run it on different machines and see what > the variance is. > > I was thinking of doing a test that measures startup time with creating > a new db and using an existing one as the first step. I was then going > to refine from there. > > Dumb sysadmin question: on Solaris, XP, and Linux, how do you find out > if your system is syncing to disk or not? I am not sure on solaris/linux. On XP it is a path through the hardware manager/device manager down the device drop downs - I will see if I have it. But probably the easiest is to write a test with one row keyed row in a table with an int data column and run an autocommit loop updating the single column. If you get ~100 xacts a second (dependent on disk speed), then syncing is happening. If you get much higher, like 1000 then no syncing. Many of the db's we get compared to, don't even do syncs by default leading to the perception issue. To understand the numbers this will catch also hardware where syncing is "correct" but abnormally fast. we have a machine that hardware caches synced writes - so syncs are instantaneous unless the cache fills, but since it has a battery backup and software to flush writes it is not "improper" - but still important to understand as not a normal case for many low end systems. > > Thanks, > > David > > P.S. I'm not prepared to have the discussion about copying from a model > database at this time. Let's just first find out what's going on... > > Mike Matrigali wrote: >