Re: performance of sql loader

On Friday 30 May 2003 12:20, rgaffuri_at_cox.net wrote:
> 1. SQLLOADER with the SQL manipulation is much slower than
> Direct Path SQLLOADER to a staging table, then insert,update, and delete to
> the master table.

Sounds about right. It's been awhile since making heavy use of SQL Loader, but DIRECT is very fast. Not surprising that manipulation could be done after loading a temp table and still be faster than normal SQL Loader.

>
> 2. As they increased the Array size or the commit size, the performance
> degradated rapidly.
>
> This sounds odd. Anyone else notice this? Or did they just do something
> wrong. Dont know what they did. They tried it before I started, I just have
> hearsay to go on. Sorry about the lack of details.

Not enough information. Increased from what? To what? If you increase the array size enough to start swapping, it may have a negative impact on performance. ;)

Jared

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Jared Still
  INET: jkstill_at_cybcon.com

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).