- 1. Options (score: 1)
- Author: "Gill, Geoffrey L." <GEOFFREY.L.GILL AT SAIC DOT COM>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 07:15:20 -0700
- Could someone please explain the ramifications of changing the following and what is typically the best setting for each. I would also like to know if this option should be in the SQL and oracle dsm.
- /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2000-05/msg01487.html (10,540 bytes)
- 2. Re: Options (score: 1)
- Author: Richard Smith <richard.smith.hs45 AT STATEFARM DOT COM>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 09:22:16 -0500
- Geoff, I would definitely recommend setting those options to their highest values in the SQL dsm.opt file. I got nearly 5X improvement in restore performance when setting those values their max setti
- /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2000-05/msg01488.html (10,428 bytes)
- 3. Options (score: 1)
- Author: GEOFFREY.L.GILL AT SAIC DOT COM [mailto:GEOFFREY.L.GILL AT SAIC DOT COM]
- Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:30:27 -0500
- Could someone please explain the ramifications of changing the following and what is typically the best setting for each. I would also like to know if this option should be in the SQL and oracle dsm.
- /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2000-05/msg01489.html (10,825 bytes)
- 4. Re: Options (score: 1)
- Author: "France, Don (Pace)" <don.france-eds AT EDS DOT COM>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 14:30:07 -0400
- There's a reported problem with TCPWindowsize on NT; the ATSC flash I read indicated you should use 63, since the NT code incorrectly considers 64 too large and forcibly resets to their default (some
- /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2000-05/msg01503.html (12,434 bytes)
- 5. Re: Options (score: 1)
- Author: Zoltan Forray <ZForray AT SATURN.VCU DOT EDU>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 14:57:01 -0400
- Apparently not. IIRC, I had this same issue/error on a W2K system.
- /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2000-05/msg01506.html (10,980 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu