[OPEN-ILS-DEV] 2.6 slowness

[Ben Shum]

Oops, I already got the details wrong in my first reply, sorry...
Evergreen 2.6 for Bibliomation was like half a year ago already, back
in April.  My head was thinking about our recent upgrade to Evergreen
2.7.  Our hardware changes happened in between those two events during
July.

So, actually when we were making the switch from Evergreen 2.5-ish to
2.6 on our old hardware, we did notice some performance drop-off for
certain areas due to the changes in terms of database structure for
including MVF/CRA.  We reported issues (some like z39.50 lookups still
stick to my mind) and got them resolved prior to 2.6.0's official
release for the community, but it's entirely possible that your
database contents react differently to those changes and others in the
2.6 series.

I'm curious to hear from other 2.6 sites now on their experiences.

-- Ben

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Ben Shum <bshum at biblio.org> wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> When we upgraded to Evergreen 2.6, we also changed a lot of our
> infrastructure in terms of moving to better database server equipment
> (faster CPU, memory, using SSDs, etc.) so at first, we felt things
> were nice and speedy.  Things became slow for us due to unforeseen
> performance issues related to large numbers of entries in our
> uncontrolled record attribute values table.  See this bug (due to be
> fixed in upcoming maintenance releases of Evergreen):
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/1374091.  When we fixed this
> in our systems, we saw significant improvement in catalog performance.
>
> That all said, the way you phrased your questions makes me wonder if
> you've already identified slowness in your catalog specifically
> relating to authorities.  Have you guys pinpointed any specific
> queries that are slow on your systems?  What makes you suspect
> authorities (which I wouldn't expect to impede regular keyword
> searches, or checkin/checkout)?
>
> When we were at the Hack-A-Way in South Carolina a few weeks ago, we
> started logging and then running explain analyze on specific queries
> from our PostgreSQL logs that appeared to be taking longer than
> generally expected.  We do not have authorities yet in our Evergreen
> system, so we can't test that particular round of things in our
> environment.  Also, I wonder about other areas, like not having enough
> memory to keep your database fully cached and getting disk I/O issues.
> Or postgresql.conf tuning choices.
>
> -- Ben
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Tim Spindler <tjspindler at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was wondering if others experienced any slowness when upgrading tot 2.6.
>> On our test server we have seen a a lot slower searches and checkins and
>> checkouts going from 2.5 to 2.6 and are trying to determine what the issue
>> is.  We are running Postgres 9.1 and have a little more than 1 million
>> authorities and we were wondering if anyone has seen similar issues.
>>
>> I am particular interested in your experience if you have a full set of
>> authorities loaded, linked and indexed.
>>
>> --
>> Tim Spindler
>> tjspindler at gmail.com
>>
>> C/W MARS
>> http://www.cwmars.org
>>
>> P   Go Green - Save a tree! Please don't print this e-mail unless it's
>> really necessary.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Benjamin Shum
> Evergreen Systems Manager
> Bibliomation, Inc.
> 24 Wooster Ave.
> Waterbury, CT 06708
> 203-577-4070, ext. 113



-- 
Benjamin Shum
Evergreen Systems Manager
Bibliomation, Inc.
24 Wooster Ave.
Waterbury, CT 06708
203-577-4070, ext. 113