1043.2000-05-05.farmer.ham.txt 2.5 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142
  1. Subject: unify performance problem on wednesday
  2. fyi .
  3. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by brenda f herod / hou / ect on 05 / 05 / 2000
  4. 09 : 01 am - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  5. rita wynne
  6. 05 / 05 / 2000 08 : 11 am
  7. to : brenda f herod / hou / ect @ ect
  8. cc :
  9. subject : unify performance problem on wednesday
  10. fyi . . . . . . . . .
  11. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by rita wynne / hou / ect on 05 / 05 / 2000 08 : 10 am
  12. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  13. from : dave nommensen 05 / 04 / 2000 06 : 56 pm
  14. to : george smith / hou / ect @ ect , edward terry / hou / ect @ ect , tricia
  15. bowen / hou / ect @ ect , randall l gay / hou / ect @ ect , patti sullivan / hou / ect @ ect , pat
  16. clynes / corp / enron @ enron , carlos j rodriguez / hou / ect @ ect , robert
  17. superty / hou / ect @ ect , bryce baxter / hou / ect @ ect , rita wynne / hou / ect @ ect , donna
  18. greif / hou / ect @ ect
  19. cc : jeff johnson / corp / enron @ enron , tommy j yanowski / hou / ect @ ect , beth
  20. perlman / hou / ect @ ect , scott williamson / hou / ect @ ect , jim ogg / hou / ect @ ect , regan
  21. m smith / hou / ect @ ect , kenneth m harmon / hou / ect @ ect
  22. subject : unify performance problem on wednesday
  23. as you are aware , the unify system experienced significant performance
  24. problems wednesday from approx 9 : 30 am - 11 : 20 am . the duration of the
  25. problem was due to a type of system behavior we had not experienced before .
  26. the problem was exacerbated by a multitude of additional user logins thinking
  27. that a fresh login might work better . additional logins never improve
  28. performance and generally degrade it , but that is another story . ( there was
  29. actually a single user with 21 sessions ! ) we had to " bounce " the server
  30. twice to bring the system back to its normal level of performance .
  31. the good news is that we found out what caused the problem . it was not a
  32. particular user or a particular report or process . it was actually an
  33. intentional change to a specific table that we have done numerous times in
  34. the past , but this particular change had drastic side effects . we have
  35. contacted sybase with this problem to see if they can help determine if the
  36. behavior is a " feature " or a bug . in the meanwhile , we will do these types
  37. of changes at night during scheduled outages .
  38. i apologize for the frustration , anxiety , and extra work brought on by this
  39. problem and will take every precaution to see that it does not happen again .
  40. if you have any further questions or comments , please feel free to give me a
  41. call .
  42. dave n .