We haven't had a MSM/UNIX system here for quite a while, so I can't verify these settings for a UNIX system. We do still have one legacy MSM v4.4.1/Windows system running. I did some testing many years ago on these settings in Windows and here's what I found:
Stack: 64K
STAP: 64K
Partition: 256
Buffer Pool: 262144
I don't think I changed any of the other parameters you mentioned.
As far as the Buffer Pool, I worked up to this number, but you may not want or need this many. I found that anything over this resulted in diminishing returns, as it apparently took more time to look thru the Buffer Table than was being saved by having a larger number. Your mileage may vary, so I'd try doubling whatever you now have and continue to do that until the system is stable. Up to a point, more Buffers definitely helps disk performance.
These parameters are also dependent on the 4GB of memory in our server.
We haven't had a MSM/UNIX system here for quite a while, so I can't verify these settings for a UNIX system. We do still have one legacy MSM v4.4.1/Windows system running. I did some testing many years ago on these settings in Windows and here's what I found:
Stack: 64K
STAP: 64K
Partition: 256
Buffer Pool: 262144
I don't think I changed any of the other parameters you mentioned.
As far as the Buffer Pool, I worked up to this number, but you may not want or need this many. I found that anything over this resulted in diminishing returns, as it apparently took more time to look thru the Buffer Table than was being saved by having a larger number. Your mileage may vary, so I'd try doubling whatever you now have and continue to do that until the system is stable. Up to a point, more Buffers definitely helps disk performance.
These parameters are also dependent on the 4GB of memory in our server.
Ron