Installation ERP.2005 SR1: Initial Data/Log Volumes SIZES

[andreas_herzog]

hi,

i did several search attempts (incl. google, sapnet & sdn) but failed to find the minimum volume sizes for the initial LOG and DATA volumes on AIX 5.3 and MaxDB 7.6.

the installation guide (SAP ERP 2005 SR1 ABAP on AIX: MaxDB, V. 1.0 - June 02, 2006) states on page 34 the requirements for the database instance as follows:

-> Unicode 70 GB

several notes (incl. 919.177, 921.593, 949.716 as well as 628.131, 814.704, 820.824 and 869.267) leaded to no conclusion regarding volume sizes.

when i started the installation program sapinst the gui comes up with a minimum of -> <b>90 gb</b> <- for all data volumes (and 2 gb for all log volumes).

=> why the difference?

=> why is there no (concrete) figure regarding space requirements?

<i>the problem is that i have to implement accurate filesystems in advance - so this was kind of unexpected and was (at least a small) drawback in the installation progress as the initial disk capacity was too small...</i>

any hints welcome! thx in advance!

GreetZ, AH

[andreas_herzog]

for those who are interested...

-> i prepared 94 gbs for the data volumes to satisfy the needs

-> installation went smoothly

-> now i got "only" 57.888.488 KB usage, <b>roughly 60%</b>

==> <b>hm...70 gb would have been sufficient!!!</b>

@sap.ag...plz work on that..thx!

GreetZ, AH

[lbreddemann]

Hi Andreas,

well perhabs this would be an issue for a support message if you consider this to be a bug.

On the other side, this setup is for the <b>initial</b> size of the installation.

Usually ERP Systems get loaded with data.

So if the recommendation would be to create the absolute minimum to finish the installation sucessfully but not allowing to work with the system that wouldn't be too good either, would it?

Best regards,

Lars

[andreas_herzog]

hi Lars,

this might be true...but: if you make a systemcopy uisng the r3load mechanism (incl. dbsize.tpl/xml) u usually run into deep filesize/tablespace size problems...so the calculation is not as adequate...i don't think it's a bug...more of a slight deviaition in the developer's mind...hrhrhr..

i've made some installations so far (started in '95 with 22d) but i've never came across such "security margins" when considering file system sizes...

=> so what...now i know + can tell what it's all about ggg

GreetZ, AH