Guy Smith <[log in to unmask]> wrote: <snip> >1) Has anyone noticed an marked increase in disc I/Os by > Memory Manager under 5.0? <snip> >Heres the issue: Weve taken a number of system to 5.0. >One system has had (a) no hardware changes, (b) no >application software changes, (c) no change in transaction >volume, (d) no changes in configuration or file placement. >This systems also (e) logs data to a small set of files >and thus there is an amazingly high data page residency >rate. > >Oh. BTW, disc I/Os for memory manager doubled after the >update. For this machine, where disc I/Os are typically >low, its not really a problem. But our 995, which is I/O >bound to begin with, will likely not react well to the >increased load. I interested in any insights anyone might >have as to the changes to memory management that would >double the I/O rate. Since this machine relies heavily on >message files (that went native in 5.0), I am tempted to >target them as suspects, though I would expect a decrease >in I/Os, not the reverse. This is really unlikely, but... I recall seeing something about a patch to increase performance on systems with small memory configurations -- perhaps you should try installing that patch. On the other hand, if you *have* installed that patch, then perhaps you should try *de-installing it*... -- Evan