If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

 
Go Back  dBforums > Database Server Software > DB2 > Recommeded SHMMAX Linux kernel parm for DB2 Linux 9.5

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-11-10, 16:38
Marcus_A Marcus_A is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 5,195
Recommeded SHMMAX Linux kernel parm for DB2 Linux 9.5

Edit: the title of this thread is wrong. It should read: Recommeded SHMALL Linux kernel parm for DB2 Linux 9.5



Here is the recommendation for SHMALL in the Redbook entitled Up and Running with DB2 on Linux (SG24-6899-01) that covers V9.5:
"In this example, SHMALL is set to 8 GB (8388608 KB = 8 GB). If you have more physical memory than 8 GB for DB2, increase the value of this parameter to approximately 90% of your computer’s physical memory."
Here is the recommendation from the current DB2 9.5 InfoCenter for SHMALL on Linux:
IPC kernel parameter: kernel.shmall (SHMALL)
Enforced minimum setting: no value is enforced
Recommended minimum value: 2 * <size of RAM in bytes> (setting is in 4K pages)
Example minimum value (system with 16GB of RAM: 8388608 (4K pages) [which is 32GB]
So the Redbook effectively states SHMALL should be 90% of real memory on a system with more than 8 GB, and the DB2 LUW 9.5 InfoCenter says it should be two times the amount of real memory for Linux. Anyone have any info on this discrepancy, or any other ideas.
__________________
M. A. Feldman
IBM Certified DBA on DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows
IBM Certified DBA on DB2 for z/OS and OS/390

Last edited by Marcus_A; 03-11-10 at 16:45.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-11-10, 17:49
n_i n_i is offline
:-)
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,448
To me, what InfoCentre says makes less sense. SHMALL only sets the limit for shared memory allocation, but it's the application that chooses to request memory. In theory if your instance and database configuration do not demand more memory than physically available, you should be OK with either setting. In practice, however, I can see how real memory could be exceeded even if the total shared memory requests are below that number.

For example, each local connection needs one shared memory segment, whose size is limited by SHMMAX. If at some point your total shared memory consumption is just a bit below the total physical memory, and then you create one more local database connection, you are immediately exceeding that limit.

In such situations you should choose what is preferable: slow death by paging (if SHMALL is more than physically available) or memory allocation errors (if SHMALL is less).
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-11-10, 19:54
db2girl db2girl is offline
∞∞∞∞∞∞
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,810
I see some notes about making changes to SHMALL recommendations, but I can't seem to find this information in the v9.5 InfoCenter. I'm using InfoCenter found here IBM DB2 9.5 Information Center for Linux, UNIX, and Windows


Am I looking in the wrong place?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-11-10, 20:04
db2girl db2girl is offline
∞∞∞∞∞∞
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,810
Sorry, never mind. I found it, had to click on "Table 1" link. It's interesting that search for SHMALL didn't find it. The information in the InfoCenter is more current.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-11-10, 20:11
Marcus_A Marcus_A is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 5,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by db2girl View Post
The information in the InfoCenter is more current.
In theory the information in the InfoCenter is more current than the PDF manuals, but it does not seem to make sense. Do you know any customers that have their Linux systems set up with SHMALL = 2 times the amount of real memory? I am assuming that one goal with DB2 is to not have any virtual memory swapping.
__________________
M. A. Feldman
IBM Certified DBA on DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows
IBM Certified DBA on DB2 for z/OS and OS/390
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-11-10, 20:18
db2girl db2girl is offline
∞∞∞∞∞∞
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,810
I'll send you an email with some information regarding this.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On