Index rebuild

My bet would be that the disk IO subsystem would be the part that would
mainly control how long it takes to perform an index rebuild. If the 450mhz
processor is continually waiting for the disk to be read/written then
increasing it further would not help any.

If done properly you could copy a database to somewhere else, do the
rebuild, and copy it back. The key word here is, of course, "properly."

I would contact the Tech. Support group for further suggestions and guidance
on this matter - they do this far more often than I do and might have a
couple of other useful suggestions.

Doug Williams
Director of Development
eManufacturing - Vantage
Epicor Software Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Funte [mailto:tfunte@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 6:53 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Index rebuild


Doug,
Would it be accurate, then, that one 1 Ghz processor box would outperform
at Quad PIII 450mhz when doing the index rebuild?

If so, maybe Bart might be able to off-load the database to a standalong PC
to:
1. See how long the Index rebuild actually takes.
2. If it works fairly well, actually do the Index rebuild on a standalone
and then copy it back to the server when it's done.

Troy

----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Williams
To: 'Wayne Cox' ; vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 6:31 PM
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


I was strictly referring to normal operations. Since, if I remember
correctly (it has been awhile), the database server is down when a ProUtil
is performed and the process is operating directly on the database I
wouldn't think that multiple processors would help in this particular case
either unless the box was also performing other, unrelated, tasks.

Doug Williams
Director of Development
eManufacturing - Vantage
Epicor Software Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 5:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Cc: dwilliams@...
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 03:14 PM 7/20/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Multi-processor utilization doesn't depend upon index structure.
Progress
>makes very effective use of a multi-processor box. Look into
Before-Image
>Writers (and After-Image ones as well). Also the -spin startup
parameter.
>The more users on a system the more multi-processors are helpful.

Agreed. But you're talking multi-user mode, with broker processes
managing
shared memory, etc.

The original topic was index rebuilding in a single user mode. I doubt
ProUtil is multi-threaded or otherwise able to take advantage of multiple
CPUs. You could try to start multiple ProUtil sessions, each rebuilding
specific indices. But if all the indices have Company and a bunch have
PartNum, they'd just be doing redundant work, and it's probably just best
to let it all crunch through one process.

Also from my experience with it, [the index rebuild] it appears to be I/O
bound. In such cases, multiple processes hammering on the same data often

complete more slowly than letting each run in succession.

-Wayne Cox



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
I am looking to rebuild the indexes on my database. I am running
Vantage 3.0 and progress 8.3b. The results from my ixanalys say that I have
209385 index blocks. What I'm wondering is if anyone can give some kind of
guideline on how long a rebuild might take.

Bart Sgroi


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
At 08:48 AM 7/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> I am looking to rebuild the indexes on my database. I am running
>Vantage 3.0 and progress 8.3b. The results from my ixanalys say that I have
>209385 index blocks. What I'm wondering is if anyone can give some kind of
>guideline on how long a rebuild might take.

Depends on the size of your .DB file and how much grunt your server
has. My 4.0 database of about 185MB recently took 8.5 minutes to re-index
on a P-II 450 with 512MB. Not bad, really.

I tried experimenting with the -B parameter on the command line for a
bigger cache space, and it actually ran SLOWER! If your default -B is
really large, you might try knocking it down with something like only -B
2000 on the command line.

It also creates temporary scratch files in your current directory. So
there may be a slight advantage to CD'ing to someplace on a different disk
spindle to spread out the I/O load.

-Wayne Cox
My database is a multi volume and it's about 3.5 GB right now. My
server is a quad processor with 1GB of memory. I'm not sure if I want to
try to rebuild all of the indexes in one night or break it up over a couple
of nights. Anyone have any experience rebuilding indexes on this size DB.

Bart Sgroi

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 1:32 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 08:48 AM 7/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> I am looking to rebuild the indexes on my database. I am running
>Vantage 3.0 and progress 8.3b. The results from my ixanalys say that I
have
>209385 index blocks. What I'm wondering is if anyone can give some kind of
>guideline on how long a rebuild might take.

Depends on the size of your .DB file and how much grunt your server
has. My 4.0 database of about 185MB recently took 8.5 minutes to re-index
on a P-II 450 with 512MB. Not bad, really.

I tried experimenting with the -B parameter on the command line for a
bigger cache space, and it actually ran SLOWER! If your default -B is
really large, you might try knocking it down with something like only -B
2000 on the command line.

It also creates temporary scratch files in your current directory. So
there may be a slight advantage to CD'ing to someplace on a different disk
spindle to spread out the I/O load.

-Wayne Cox




Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Idxbuild on our 700MB database took about 45 minutes this week on a Dual PII-450mhz with 512MB of RAM. Vantage 5.0.

Troy Funte
Liberty Electronics


----- Original Message -----
From: Sgroi, Bart T.
To: 'vantage@yahoogroups.com'
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 1:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


My database is a multi volume and it's about 3.5 GB right now. My
server is a quad processor with 1GB of memory. I'm not sure if I want to
try to rebuild all of the indexes in one night or break it up over a couple
of nights. Anyone have any experience rebuilding indexes on this size DB.

Bart Sgroi

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 1:32 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 08:48 AM 7/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> I am looking to rebuild the indexes on my database. I am running
>Vantage 3.0 and progress 8.3b. The results from my ixanalys say that I
have
>209385 index blocks. What I'm wondering is if anyone can give some kind of
>guideline on how long a rebuild might take.

Depends on the size of your .DB file and how much grunt your server
has. My 4.0 database of about 185MB recently took 8.5 minutes to re-index
on a P-II 450 with 512MB. Not bad, really.

I tried experimenting with the -B parameter on the command line for a
bigger cache space, and it actually ran SLOWER! If your default -B is
really large, you might try knocking it down with something like only -B
2000 on the command line.

It also creates temporary scratch files in your current directory. So
there may be a slight advantage to CD'ing to someplace on a different disk
spindle to spread out the I/O load.

-Wayne Cox




Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
At 10:37 AM 7/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> My database is a multi volume and it's about 3.5 GB right now. My
>server is a quad processor with 1GB of memory. I'm not sure if I want to
>try to rebuild all of the indexes in one night or break it up over a couple
>of nights. Anyone have any experience rebuilding indexes on this size DB.

Yikes! You didn't mention that the first time?!?! Just curious - how many
users and how long you been runnin' to accumulate that much?

Don't think there's any way to utilize the multi-processors well, esp with
Vantage's concatenated-field indices. And the rebuild time increase is
probably less than linear with DB size. But still... Ought to be less than
10 or 12 hours?? Maybe someone over in the DBA group at peg.com would have
an idea, but I've never heard of any Vantage installations that large.

The -B thing I mentioned was really weird. I ran the re-index the first
time, and it took 8.5 minutes. The NT Task Manager said it wasn't
consuming much memory (we have -B 4000 in startup.pf) Just for grins, I
ran it again with -B 50000 on the command line with proutil. That should
be nearly 200MB or enough to completely cache my DB, and it took over 12
minutes. Task manager showed it chewing up 200MB, as well. It just sat
there for a minute or 2 before and after the index build. Perhaps it took
a long time to allocate and deallocate the memory, but never used
it?! Looking in Vantage.LG, the actual rebuild time was identical in both
cases. Just a bunch of dead time on each end. Strange.

-Wayne Cox
Multi-processor utilization doesn't depend upon index structure. Progress
makes very effective use of a multi-processor box. Look into Before-Image
Writers (and After-Image ones as well). Also the -spin startup parameter.
The more users on a system the more multi-processors are helpful.

Doug Williams
Director of Development
eManufacturing - Vantage
Epicor Software Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 3:11 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 10:37 AM 7/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> My database is a multi volume and it's about 3.5 GB right now. My
>server is a quad processor with 1GB of memory. I'm not sure if I want to
>try to rebuild all of the indexes in one night or break it up over a couple
>of nights. Anyone have any experience rebuilding indexes on this size DB.

Yikes! You didn't mention that the first time?!?! Just curious - how many
users and how long you been runnin' to accumulate that much?

Don't think there's any way to utilize the multi-processors well, esp with
Vantage's concatenated-field indices. And the rebuild time increase is
probably less than linear with DB size. But still... Ought to be less than
10 or 12 hours?? Maybe someone over in the DBA group at peg.com would have
an idea, but I've never heard of any Vantage installations that large.

The -B thing I mentioned was really weird. I ran the re-index the first
time, and it took 8.5 minutes. The NT Task Manager said it wasn't
consuming much memory (we have -B 4000 in startup.pf) Just for grins, I
ran it again with -B 50000 on the command line with proutil. That should
be nearly 200MB or enough to completely cache my DB, and it took over 12
minutes. Task manager showed it chewing up 200MB, as well. It just sat
there for a minute or 2 before and after the index build. Perhaps it took
a long time to allocate and deallocate the memory, but never used
it?! Looking in Vantage.LG, the actual rebuild time was identical in both
cases. Just a bunch of dead time on each end. Strange.

-Wayne Cox



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Wayne,
We've been running Vantage for about 3 years now. During business
hours we usually have around 80 people logged onto Vantage. I don't think I
can afford to shut down for 10 or 12 hours, so I think a safe bet is going
to be to rebuild the worst of the indexes first and see how much time it
takes to do a couple of them and then parcel them out over a couple of
weeks. I'm getting to old to stay up too late.

Bart Sgroi

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 4:11 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 10:37 AM 7/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
> My database is a multi volume and it's about 3.5 GB right now. My
>server is a quad processor with 1GB of memory. I'm not sure if I want to
>try to rebuild all of the indexes in one night or break it up over a couple
>of nights. Anyone have any experience rebuilding indexes on this size DB.

Yikes! You didn't mention that the first time?!?! Just curious - how many
users and how long you been runnin' to accumulate that much?

Don't think there's any way to utilize the multi-processors well, esp with
Vantage's concatenated-field indices. And the rebuild time increase is
probably less than linear with DB size. But still... Ought to be less than
10 or 12 hours?? Maybe someone over in the DBA group at peg.com would have
an idea, but I've never heard of any Vantage installations that large.

The -B thing I mentioned was really weird. I ran the re-index the first
time, and it took 8.5 minutes. The NT Task Manager said it wasn't
consuming much memory (we have -B 4000 in startup.pf) Just for grins, I
ran it again with -B 50000 on the command line with proutil. That should
be nearly 200MB or enough to completely cache my DB, and it took over 12
minutes. Task manager showed it chewing up 200MB, as well. It just sat
there for a minute or 2 before and after the index build. Perhaps it took
a long time to allocate and deallocate the memory, but never used
it?! Looking in Vantage.LG, the actual rebuild time was identical in both
cases. Just a bunch of dead time on each end. Strange.

-Wayne Cox



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
At 03:14 PM 7/20/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Multi-processor utilization doesn't depend upon index structure. Progress
>makes very effective use of a multi-processor box. Look into Before-Image
>Writers (and After-Image ones as well). Also the -spin startup parameter.
>The more users on a system the more multi-processors are helpful.

Agreed. But you're talking multi-user mode, with broker processes managing
shared memory, etc.

The original topic was index rebuilding in a single user mode. I doubt
ProUtil is multi-threaded or otherwise able to take advantage of multiple
CPUs. You could try to start multiple ProUtil sessions, each rebuilding
specific indices. But if all the indices have Company and a bunch have
PartNum, they'd just be doing redundant work, and it's probably just best
to let it all crunch through one process.

Also from my experience with it, [the index rebuild] it appears to be I/O
bound. In such cases, multiple processes hammering on the same data often
complete more slowly than letting each run in succession.

-Wayne Cox
I was strictly referring to normal operations. Since, if I remember
correctly (it has been awhile), the database server is down when a ProUtil
is performed and the process is operating directly on the database I
wouldn't think that multiple processors would help in this particular case
either unless the box was also performing other, unrelated, tasks.

Doug Williams
Director of Development
eManufacturing - Vantage
Epicor Software Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 5:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Cc: dwilliams@...
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 03:14 PM 7/20/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Multi-processor utilization doesn't depend upon index structure. Progress
>makes very effective use of a multi-processor box. Look into Before-Image
>Writers (and After-Image ones as well). Also the -spin startup parameter.
>The more users on a system the more multi-processors are helpful.

Agreed. But you're talking multi-user mode, with broker processes managing
shared memory, etc.

The original topic was index rebuilding in a single user mode. I doubt
ProUtil is multi-threaded or otherwise able to take advantage of multiple
CPUs. You could try to start multiple ProUtil sessions, each rebuilding
specific indices. But if all the indices have Company and a bunch have
PartNum, they'd just be doing redundant work, and it's probably just best
to let it all crunch through one process.

Also from my experience with it, [the index rebuild] it appears to be I/O
bound. In such cases, multiple processes hammering on the same data often
complete more slowly than letting each run in succession.

-Wayne Cox
Doug,
Would it be accurate, then, that one 1 Ghz processor box would outperform at Quad PIII 450mhz when doing the index rebuild?

If so, maybe Bart might be able to off-load the database to a standalong PC to:
1. See how long the Index rebuild actually takes.
2. If it works fairly well, actually do the Index rebuild on a standalone and then copy it back to the server when it's done.

Troy

----- Original Message -----
From: Doug Williams
To: 'Wayne Cox' ; vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 6:31 PM
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


I was strictly referring to normal operations. Since, if I remember
correctly (it has been awhile), the database server is down when a ProUtil
is performed and the process is operating directly on the database I
wouldn't think that multiple processors would help in this particular case
either unless the box was also performing other, unrelated, tasks.

Doug Williams
Director of Development
eManufacturing - Vantage
Epicor Software Corporation


-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Cox [mailto:wmc@...]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 5:07 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Cc: dwilliams@...
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Index rebuild


At 03:14 PM 7/20/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Multi-processor utilization doesn't depend upon index structure. Progress
>makes very effective use of a multi-processor box. Look into Before-Image
>Writers (and After-Image ones as well). Also the -spin startup parameter.
>The more users on a system the more multi-processors are helpful.

Agreed. But you're talking multi-user mode, with broker processes managing
shared memory, etc.

The original topic was index rebuilding in a single user mode. I doubt
ProUtil is multi-threaded or otherwise able to take advantage of multiple
CPUs. You could try to start multiple ProUtil sessions, each rebuilding
specific indices. But if all the indices have Company and a bunch have
PartNum, they'd just be doing redundant work, and it's probably just best
to let it all crunch through one process.

Also from my experience with it, [the index rebuild] it appears to be I/O
bound. In such cases, multiple processes hammering on the same data often
complete more slowly than letting each run in succession.

-Wayne Cox



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]