Mysql performance on solaris

We have planned to run a mysql database on a SUN SPARC box with Solaris 9, but compared to a small linux box the performance seems to be bad. Our test is with only one user and no additional load on the machines. The Linux box is about 5 times faster (response time ) than the SUN box. My questions are:
- will it get better on solaris10??
- can I tune mysql or Solaris for a better performance??

Similar Messages

Problem in compiling mysql++ libraries on Solaris 8 using Sun C++ compiler

Hi!
I am trying to compile the mysql++ libraries on Solaris 8 using the Sun C++ compiler CC 5.3 version.
but I get an error:
"../../../../tools/mysql++/lib//resiter.h", line 53: Error: Invalid template parameter default.
Can anyone let me know what can be the problem and whats the solution for the same.
Thanks,
Manik Gupta.

The name of this forum is 'Java compiler'. Your question has nothing to do with that.

T2000 MYSQL performance

Hi
My application team use MYSQL on v490 but decided it was too slow.
So now they have a T2000 and complain that it is taking twice as long to run reports.
When they run their report it immediately grabs 18gb of memory and only about 1-2% cpu.
I have been told this is normal !
The 2 system specs are:
T2000
1 x 1200 MHZ UltraSPARC T1
8 core 32 threads
32gb memory
S1 disk array 3 x 146gb disk
software raidz
2 x onboard 1000 base T Ethernet
Solaris 10 08/07 .
No Zone or Domain setup
Sun Fire V490
2 x 1500 MHZ UltraSPARC IV+ CPU
16gb memory
S1 disk array 3 x 146gb disk
software raidz
2 x 100baseT Quad Fast Ethernet PCI
Solaris 10 05/06
Has 4 zones, Global, Prod, pre-prod and Dev
Can anyone explain why it should run slower on a T2000. I cannot see any reason when running prstat, sar, iostat. Other than it is using lots of memory and lots of swap.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Steve.
Edited by: YOYO on Mar 4, 2008 8:22 AM

Performance is a tricky thing to predict between processor architectures.
But the T2000 is based on 32 (or 8 depending on definition) relatively slow processors.
Where as the v490 has 2 faster ones (compared to the T2000 at least).
So the T2000 is only going to perform well on a workload with lots of queries going on in parallel.
Chances are running a report doesnt provide much opportunity for parallelism. So it doesnt sound surprising to me that its slower than the v490.
This is born out by the figures you quote. A single thread of execution can only grab at most 1/32 of the machine ie about 3% CPU.
So your probably CPU bound.
But if you can run 32 reports in parallel, your laughing.
Basically the x86 world is streets ahead in performance at the moment except in a small subset of cases with high levels of opportunity for parallelism.

Any Good link for mysql Installation in solaris 10?

Please share with me good link for mysql, Tomcat installation(latest version)
I found http://instmysql5sol10.blogspot.com/ in internet but not able to download "Download the packages (both Standard and Max) and save them in an appropriate directory".

alan.pae wrote:
attempted to install Solaris on it. Everything goes OK but I am confused by an info message that I get upon booting the system from CD:
SunOS Release 5.10 Version Generic_137138-09 *32-bit* You got it installed and then you booted from the CD???
If you booted from the hard disk then run:
isainfo -kv
alanNo, of course not. It isn't installed yet. I meant that I booted the
computer from from the install DVD to start the installation process.
But thanks for the info. I'll install it and will run this command.

NFS performance with Solaris 10

Hello,
We have been playing with one of the x4200s running s10u2, or snv_50 for that matter, and are getting terrible numbers from the NFS performance. Initially, we suspected it was just the ZFS filesystem on the back (which it was, though zil_disable made it a lot better), but even after exploring a little I am getting terrible numbers for NFS backed by UFS. Using afio to unafio a file on the disk gives:
Local:
afio: 432m+131k+843 bytes read in 263 seconds. The operation was successful.
Remote:
afio: 432m+131k+843 bytes read in 1670 seconds. The operation was
successful.
I have raised the ncsize to 1000000, and upped the server threads to 1024.
The same thing on a linux box(ext3) turns in local times of 100 seconds and remote at 180 seconds. The differences in the local and remote numbers are just crazy. The difference in the ZFS is way worse:
Local zfs:
afio: 432m+131k+843 bytes read in 137 seconds. The operation was successful.
NFS -> ZFS:
afio: 432m+131k+843 bytes read in 2428 seconds. The operation was
successful.
I have started looking into dtrace for tracking the problem, but don't have much to report yet.
Any suggestions appreciated.

Ask this on the Solaris Forum, not the Java Networking forum.
Edit: typo

MySQL links in Solaris 11.2 have gone from /usr/mysql/bin

I see that Solaris 11.2 now comes with MySQL 5.5 but I notice that the symbolic links (/usr/mysql/bin, etc) have been removed from all the packages.
# Solaris 11.1
# ls -l /usr/mysql/
total 9
drwxr-xr-x   8 root     bin            8 Feb 15 2012 5.1
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           7 Feb 15 2012 bin -> 5.1/bin
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           8 Feb 15 2012 docs -> 5.1/docs
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root          11 Feb 15 2012 include -> 5.1/include
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           7 Feb 15 2012 lib -> 5.1/lib
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           7 Feb 15 2012 man -> 5.1/man
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root     root           9 Feb 15 2012 share -> 5.1/share
# Solaris 11.1
# pkg contents -r -m database/[email protected]| grep "link path=usr/mysql/"
link path=usr/mysql/5.1/bin/64 target=sparcv9 variant.arch=sparc
link path=usr/mysql/bin target=5.1/bin
link path=usr/mysql/5.1/bin/64 target=amd64 variant.arch=i386
link path=usr/mysql/share target=5.1/share
link path=usr/mysql/docs target=5.1/docs
# Solaris 11.2
# pkg contents -r -m database/[email protected] | grep "link path=usr/mysql/"
link path=usr/mysql/5.1/bin/64 target=amd64 variant.arch=i386
link path=usr/mysql/5.1/bin/64 target=sparcv9 variant.arch=sparc
Should they be added back?
Andrew

This is not an oversight. As MySQL 5.1 libraries are not compatible with the 5.5 version and to avoid some breaks, you must check and modify all programs and/or scripts that you use if you want to use this new version.

OpenGL/Elite3D Performance in Solaris 10?

Hi Folks,
I've searched but can't seem to find anything on this.
I have an Ultra-2 with 2x300MHz, 640MB of RAM, and an Elite3d-M6 framebuffer. Life is good, and Solaris 10 is great.
But - I use a brain modeling application that converts MRI images of the skull to 3d maps of the brain. Under Solaris 9, performance was awesome - fully accelerated, very smooth rotation and scrolling of the 3d models.
Using the same software under solaris 10, its graphics performance is very poor. I've also noticed that the OpenGL plugin for Xmms (which ran great under Solaris 9) performs terribly in Solaris 10. The problem is the same in both CDE and JDS.
To me, this says 'OpenGL' problem. But I've done a full Solaris 10 install (and several re-installs, for other reasons), and performance is equally poor with all versions. OpenGL really seems to be installed and working properly, but performance is really bad. Does anyone have any ideas about this one?
Thanks,
tim

I found out about Update 4 very shortly after posting this, and I have now upgraded. Unfortunately, the problem still persists.

Performance on Solaris 10 - Operating system paging

Has anyone experience performance issues after an upgrade from Solaris 9 to Solaris 10 on SAP systems with limited memory?
We have many systems that are on servers with 4 Gig of memory and ran well on Solaris 9. After an upgrade to Solaris 10 we are experiencing very high OS system paging rates. The response times of the SAP systems are very poor when this occurs. It seems to take very little load to cause this.
I realize more memory or decreases in Oracle or SAP memory parms will solve this but am wondering if there is anything on the Solaris OS that could resolve this?
Thanks,
Dan

DISM can be used but in global zone only (according to Sun document "Best Practive for Running Database in Solaris Containers" , the proc_lock_memory privilege which is required to run the ora_dism_ process is not available in non globale zone)
The doc i got is from 2005, so don't know if the Sun recommendations has been updated since then.
In order to activate DISM (if you are in a global zone), sga_max_size should be set up larger than the sum of sga components: db_cache_size, shared_pool_size ...)
Also look for the Sun Blueprint "Dynamic Reconfiguration and Oracle 9i Dynamic Resizable SGA" on http://www.sun.com/blueprints
If you use ISM because in a non-global zone, you can use oracle parameter lock_sga to ensure the SGA is loaded into the RAM and useism_for_pga = true to ensure PGA is loaded into the RAM.
Make sure you have enough RAM to hold filesystem cache (OS memory) , oracle memory, and applications memory
Make sur your PGA and SGA are correctly sized size, since you won't be able to dynamically change the ISM allocation. (see v$shared_pool_advice, v$db_cache_advice, v$pga_target_advice ...)
Take the usual precautions:
- have a successfull backup first
- do the change on a test machine
- and/or ask your vendor before proceeding
Other Doc to read ...
Note 697483 - "Oracle Dynamic SGA on Solaris" (recommends to read Sun doc n°230653)
Note 724713 - parameter settings for Solaris 10, here is an extract :
Only one parameter from SAP note 395438 should remain in file
etc/system
set rlim_fd_cur=8192
As described in SunSolve document 215536, the "Large Page Out Of the Box" (LPOOB) feature of the Solaris 10 memory management, first implemented in Solaris 10 1/06 (Update 1), can lead to performance problems when the system runs out of large chunks of free contiguous memory. This is because the Solaris 10 kernel by default will attempt to relocate memory pages to free up space for creating larger blocks of contiguous memory. Known symptoms are high %system CPU time in vmstat, high number of cross calls in mpstat, and Oracle calling mmap(2) to /dev/zero for getting more memory.
Memory page relocation for satisfying large page allocation requests can be disabled by setting the following Solaris kernel parameter in /etc/system
set pg_contig_disable=1
This will not switch off the LPOOB feature. Large memory pages will still be used when enough free space of contiguous memory is available, so the benefits of this feature will remain
Note 870652 - Installation of SAP in a Solaris Zone
Note 1246022 - Support for SAP applications in Solaris Zones
Edited by: Emmanuel TCHENG on Oct 13, 2009 12:02 PM

Poor Elite3D OpenGL performance in Solaris 10

I'm running an old Ultra10 with an Elite3D-m3. Since I installed Solaris 10, I've had a very slow desktop and awful performance in 3D applications. This tells me that there's something wrong between the video card and OpenGL, like it's in software graphics mode. How can I tell if I'm actually running in software OpenGL or if it's the proper performance for the card? Do I need special drivers to run it since the card is so old?

I found out about Update 4 very shortly after posting this, and I have now upgraded. Unfortunately, the problem still persists.

Poor I/O Performance on Solaris - v1.4.1_01

Does anyone have any comments on the following?
It's an I/O analysis done to determine which Java
methods might be used to replace an existing C++
platform-specific file re-compression subsystem.
The system has to handle up to 200,000 files per
day (every day).
Java IO test results for converting ZERO_ONE compressed
files to standard compressed files.
Java 1.4.1, 12-04-2002
The input dataset contains 623,230,991 bytes in 1391 files.
The input files are in ZERO_ONE compression format.
For all tests:
1) an input data file was opened in buffered mode.
2) the data was read from the input and expanded
(byte by byte).
3) the expanded data was written to a compressing
output stream as it was created.
4) repeat 1 thru 3 for each file.
64K buffers were used for all input and output streams.
Note: Items marked with "**" hang at random on Solaris
(2.7 & 2.8) when processing a large number of small files. They always hang on BufferedInputStream.read().
There may be a deadlock situation with the 'process
reaper' because we're calling 'exec()' and 'waitFor()'
so quickly. The elapsed times for those items are
estimates based on the volume of data processed up to
the point where the process hung. This 'bug' has been
reported to Sun.
-- elapsed time --
NT Solaris 2.7 Method
n/a 18 min Current C++ code:
fopen(r) -> system(compress)
19 min 19 min ** BufferedInputStream -> exec(compress)
29 min 21 min 1) BufferdInputStream -> file
2) exec(compress file)
24 min 42 min ** BufferedInputStream -> exec(gzip)
77 min 136 min BufferedInputStream -> GZIPOutputStream
77 min -- BufferedInputStream -> ZipOutputStream
The performance of GZIPOutputStream and ZipOutputStream
makes them useless for any Production system. The 2x
performance degradation on Solaris (vs NT) for these two
streams is surprising. Does this imply that the 'libz'
on Solaris is flawed? Notice that whenever 'libz' is
involved in the process stream (exec(gzip),
GZIPOutputStream, ZipOutputStream) the elapsed time
climbs dramatically on Solaris.

Re-submitted Performance Matrix with formatting retained.
Note: for the "-> system()" and "-> exec()" methods, we write to the
STDIN of the spawned process.
-- elapsed time --
NT     Solaris 2.7 Method
n/a    18 min      Current Solaris C++ code:
                     fopen(r) -> system("compress -c >aFile")
19 min 19 min **   BufferedInputStream -> exec("compress -c >aFile")
29 min 21 min      1) BufferdInputStream -> "aFile"
                   2) exec("compress aFile")
24 min 42 min **   BufferedInputStream -> exec("gzip -c aFile")
77 min 136 min     BufferedInputStream -> GZIPOutputStream("aFile")
77 min --          BufferedInputStream -> ZipOutputStream("aFile")

MySQL performance on Windows

Hi all.
I have been using LV2010SP1 with MySQL to implement data acquisition systems for hundreds of channels. I typically run the MySQL instance on the same machine as the LV app and I love the synergy this combo provides. I interface LV with the database using Mike Porter's excellent ADO database toolkit. (I can't find a link to it presently but I found it on the forums.)
I have a LV process to collect the data into a table. I have another LV process to mine a small subset of channels for plotting on a chart.
I have run into a few limitations with my implementation. When the number of records in the table grew to >250K, the process of querying the table began to grow large. I now see query times longer than 50 seconds while I'm trying to refresh the chart every 10 seconds. This obviously won't work.
The current machine I am using is a Toshiba Satellite with a quad core i3, 4GB RAM, 500GB HDD, and Windows 7. When I examine the task manager in Windows, it shows most of the processor time spent idle. When I look at the MySQL Workbench performance charts, they seem to indicate a low level of activity. I'm not sure what to do to boost the performance of this setup. Have any of you expeienced similar problems?
Thanks.

I use sqlite (with a LV interface I wrote) so if the problem isn't related to some quirk with mysql, I might be able to point you in the right direction.
Is the query slow when you don't have the collection process running? (maybe some kind of contention between the reader and writer).
Is it still slow if you break the query up into smaller queries? (I'm not sure what the ADO toolkit offers but limit and offset should work although they probably aren't the ideal method, this might indicate some memory handling issues)
Are you sure that the query is the slow part, and not display code or something else? (easiest to check by just running the query by itself, be sure to try combining this with breaking up the query)
What does the slow query and database schema look like? (maybe you need to add an index or adjust the table structures)
Does it become gradually slower or suddenly jump from fast to slow?

WebLogic 6.0 performance on Solaris (Excessive polling)

We have a problem with SunOs 5.8, multi (2) CPU, 1GB memory Weblogic 6.0 sp1 and
java 1.3.0.
While running some benchmarks we realized that the tests run much faster (25%-40%
faster) on a NT Pentium III 800 MHz desktop with 256MB RAM than on our Sun Ultra-250
with the above configuration.
So, we decided to do some profiling by turning on hprof (-X:runhprof:cpu=samples,depth=12)
and realized that over 50% of the time is spent in polling the sockets (weblogic.socket.PosixSocketMuxer.poll).
On NT, only 0.23% time is spent on the same activity. I do not know if on NT WebLogic
uses a different IPC model (select vs. interrupt) but the time taken on Solaris
doing polls is outrageous. I am wondering if anybody else out there has experienced
the same problem? Any insights you have to share on this will be appreciated.
TIA,
-Anil Singhal

The Xprof output is misleading - this does not mean that 50% of
the CPU is spent on polling sockets. It simply means that 50% of the thread samples
were in a polling method (probably waiting, not running).
Yes, I believe that an 800MHz PIII would blow away an ES-250 which runs at less
that 300MHz. So you have 2CPU -> 600MHz. Then
(800-600)/800 = 25% which is what you get.
Mike
"Michael Girdley" <----> wrote:
Are you using the performance pack? If not, you should.
Michael Girdley
BEA Systems
Learning WebLogic? http://learnweblogic.com
"Anil Singhal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3adc4f27$[email protected]..
We have a problem with SunOs 5.8, multi (2) CPU, 1GB memory Weblogic6.0
sp1 and
java 1.3.0.
While running some benchmarks we realized that the tests run much faster(25%-40%
faster) on a NT Pentium III 800 MHz desktop with 256MB RAM than onour Sun
Ultra-250
with the above configuration.
So, we decided to do some profiling by turning on hprof(-X:runhprof:cpu=samples,depth=12)
and realized that over 50% of the time is spent in polling the sockets(weblogic.socket.PosixSocketMuxer.poll).
On NT, only 0.23% time is spent on the same activity. I do not knowif on
NT WebLogic
uses a different IPC model (select vs. interrupt) but the time takenon
Solaris
doing polls is outrageous. I am wondering if anybody else out therehas
experienced
the same problem? Any insights you have to share on this will beappreciated.
TIA,
-Anil Singhal

WebLogic 6.0 performance on Solaris vs NT

Has anybody tried comparing the performance of WebLogic 6.0 sp1 on Solaris (SunOS
5.8) with NT 4.0? Please post your experiences.
TIA,
-Anil

The Xprof output is misleading - this does not mean that 50% of
the CPU is spent on polling sockets. It simply means that 50% of the thread samples
were in a polling method (probably waiting, not running).
Yes, I believe that an 800MHz PIII would blow away an ES-250 which runs at less
that 300MHz. So you have 2CPU -> 600MHz. Then
(800-600)/800 = 25% which is what you get.
Mike
"Michael Girdley" <----> wrote:
Are you using the performance pack? If not, you should.
Michael Girdley
BEA Systems
Learning WebLogic? http://learnweblogic.com
"Anil Singhal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:3adc4f27$[email protected]..
We have a problem with SunOs 5.8, multi (2) CPU, 1GB memory Weblogic6.0
sp1 and
java 1.3.0.
While running some benchmarks we realized that the tests run much faster(25%-40%
faster) on a NT Pentium III 800 MHz desktop with 256MB RAM than onour Sun
Ultra-250
with the above configuration.
So, we decided to do some profiling by turning on hprof(-X:runhprof:cpu=samples,depth=12)
and realized that over 50% of the time is spent in polling the sockets(weblogic.socket.PosixSocketMuxer.poll).
On NT, only 0.23% time is spent on the same activity. I do not knowif on
NT WebLogic
uses a different IPC model (select vs. interrupt) but the time takenon
Solaris
doing polls is outrageous. I am wondering if anybody else out therehas
experienced
the same problem? Any insights you have to share on this will beappreciated.
TIA,
-Anil Singhal

MySQL performance tuning

I am conducting some research as to the effects of my.cnf tuning to the performance of MySQL under OS X.
To my surprise, I've found this subject quite undocumented on the internet, so I would like some info about which variables have the greatest impact.
I have already encountered the article concerning skip-thread-priority, and have included it in the testing file, but I'm wondering if there's any database experts who have found other values that seem to boost it that little bit more.
Also, I would like to know if there's any difference between OS X Client and OS X Server on this matter, and if so, whether this is documented anywhere.
17" Core 2 Duo Macbook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.8)

No one can tell you how to tune your database because there are too many variables that are specific to your installation.
Some of the major factors hinge on the size of your database tables, both in terms of number of rows and the type of data within them. Then there's questions of whether you're using InnoDB or MyISAM, the cacheability of the data, the ratio of reads to writes, the size of each record, etc., etc., etc.
Tuning paramaters for a 4 TB database with 20,000,000 rows are going to be radically different than those for a 100MB database with 10,000 rows.
Then, of course, there are factors that aren't in my.cnf anyway - things like table indexes, data formats, query structure, etc.
The same query can take radically different amounts of time depending on the indexes on the table. Conversely, much (most?) performance tuning comes down to query optimization rather than database configuration - reordering the parameters in a query can have dramatic effects on performance, depending on the database structure.
So, you see, you're not likely to find a magic bullet that says 'make sure you add the gofaster=1 parameter to your my.cnf'. Database Administrators make a living with this stuff and every situation is different.

Poor MySQL Performance after updating Hyper-V Host to 2012R2

Hi
I recently updated one of our 2008R2 Hyper-V Hosts (Standalone) to 2012 R2. (64GB Memory, SSD Raid1 at LSI Controller + SAS RAID1 for Host OS)
Now one of the VMs (2008R2, Generation 1, fixed .vhdx on SSD RAID, 20GB fixed RAM, 4 Cores) performes really bad.
This VM is running a MySQL Database. The performance is VERY poor over a network as well as on the local system (Same task in our Application takes more than double the time as before).
The VM itself wasn't changed in any kind.
While file copy and overall performance of the VM seem to be OK, SQL queries are extremely slow.
CPU Usage of VM stays nearly idle, it only uses 2GB RAM, but the virtual Disk I/O only reaches about 8 KByte/s!!! (File Copy between 200 and 400 MB/s)
Checked same VM again on different Hardware -> same result...
Really have no ideas any more.

Hi LiwoCN,
aha "my Application (Sage New Classic)".
Da kann ich bestimmt in deutsch helfen (otherwise I can translate it to english).
Sage New CL - das ist genau auch unser Ding. Hier kann ich (evtl.) ein paar Tipps geben:
Sofern es noch nicht getätigt ist, ist mit MySQL und Sage Classic Line und HYPER-V folgende Einstellung eklatant wichtig:
Sowohl den HYPER-V Host wie auch die Gast VM in den Energiesparoptionen auf "Höchstleistung" stellen. Sowie in den "Erweiterten Energieeinstellungen ändern" den Punkt "Prozessorenergieverwaltung" - Maximaler Leistungszustand des Prozessors" auf 100 % stellen.
Das ist zwar nicht im Sinne eines Energiesparens aber das treibt die Performanz der MySQL & New CL deutlich nach oben.
Fahren Sie dann in der New CL denn den DMOPERF Test. Optimal sind Werte unter 300. Alles drüber ist für den Nutzer quasi nicht akzeptabel (zu langsam). Wir erreichen mit HYPER-V recht optimale Werte um die 100 herum. Hinweis: Den DMOPERF Test am besten direkt
auf dem MySQL Server ausführen (also dort auch einen CL Clienten installieren). So grenzt man zumindest ein, ob es sich um ein VM Problem oder um ein LAN Problem handelt.
Des weiteren sollte man die VHD wo die MySQL DB drauf läuft als VHDX und als SCSI HDD einbinden. Sofern notwendig (abhängig von der Gast VM, wenn diese kleiner als Windows 2012 R2 ist), das Systemlaufwerk per IDE und das Datenlaufwerk (wo die MySQL drauf
läuft) als SCSI.
VMQ für die VM sollte eingeschaltet sein - aber Achtung nur richtige Server LAN Karten können dies! Alternativ kann man auch mit SR-IOV Treibern arbeiten. Aber wie gesagt, dass bringt nur Punkte, wenn die VM an sich ordentlich läuft (daher nicht primär wichtig).
Finetuning kann man dann noch in der sageclmy.ini (?:\Sage\Sage New Classic\MySQL 560\bin\) ausführen. Dies erfolgt aber auf eigenes Risiko, daher bitte vorsichtig mit den Parametern umgehen! Die Original sageclmy.ini zuvor bitte sichern!
Abhängig von dem VM Gast Werten (vor allem RAM), kann man die innodb Werte optimieren. Für eine VM mit 16 GB RAM haben wir diese Werte als optimal ermittelt.
innodb_data_file_path           = ibdata1:10M:autoextend
innodb_buffer_pool_size         = 10G
innodb_log_file_size            = 2G
innodb_log_buffer_size          = 8M
innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 2
innodb_lock_wait_timeout        = 50
innodb_log_files_in_group       = 4
innodb_support_xa               = 0
innodb_thread_concurrency       = 0
myisam_max_sort_file_size       = 4M
Obiges gibt vor allem dem Buffer Pool 10 GB RAM und den Log-Files 2 GB RAM. Die Sage Original Vorgaben sind deutlich geringer. Trotzdem immer bedenken, zu große Buffer machen sich bei vielen Schreibvorgängen auch negativ bemerkbar. Daher hier evtl. selbst
ein Optimum ermitteln.
Ich hoffe das hilft weiter...
Danke und liebe Grüße Oliver Richter

Mysql performance on solaris

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for