Return-Path: Received: from ensim.rackshack.net (root@localhost) by orafaq.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h8PHmru15767 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:48:53 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 66.27.56.210 Received: from ns3.fatcity.com (rrcs-west-66-27-56-210.biz.rr.com [66.27.56.210]) by ensim.rackshack.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h8PHmqc15761 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:48:52 -0500 Received: from ns3.fatcity.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ns3.fatcity.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h8PFA1bu029642 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 08:10:11 -0700 Received: (from root@localhost) by ns3.fatcity.com (8.12.8/8.12.5/Submit) id h8PEjREI014254 for oracle-l@orafaq.net; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:45:28 -0700 Received: by fatcity.com (05-Jun-2003/v1.0g-b73/bab) via fatcity.com id 005D10CE; Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:44:46 -0800 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 07:44:46 -0800 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L X-Comment: Oracle RDBMS Community Forum X-Sender: "Tanel Poder" Sender: ml-errors@fatcity.com Reply-To: ORACLE-L@fatcity.com Errors-To: ML-ERRORS@fatcity.com From: "Tanel Poder" Subject: Re: Multiple block sizes Organization: Fat City Network Services, San Diego, California X-ListServer: v1.0g, build 73; ListGuru (c) 1996-2003 Bruce A. Bergman Precedence: bulk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_13B5_01C3838C.8AECCA20" ------=_NextPart_000_13B5_01C3838C.8AECCA20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageHi! I think putting your small tables to 2K block size is quite pointless = (unless you have tens of thousands of these tables continously in buffer = cache). Tanel. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Avnish.Rastogi@providence.org=20 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM Subject: RE: Multiple block sizes I have little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K = block 'cause Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in = large block would help in reducing IO. All the tables are in 8K block = size but you can think about putting small tables in 2K or 4KB block = size to better utilize your RAM. We are on AIX 5.1 , Oracle 9202. -----Original Message----- From: Mladen Gogala [mailto:mladen@wangtrading.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 9:05 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: Multiple block sizes Does anybody have any experience with the multiple block sizes in = the database? I'm about to reconfigure my database to have a tablespace with blocksize 16k in addition to = the existing 8k tablespaces. Tables in this tablespace will be loaded weekly and read daily, frequently = using full table scan (DW style reporting. I'm planning to have bitmap indexes and the rest of the DW arsenal). = Does anybody have any negative experiences=20 with that kind of stuff? It's 9.2.0.4 on RH 7.3. Am I running into = ora-7445 and ora-0600 type errors?=20 -- Mladen Gogala Oracle DBA=20 Note: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain = confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No = confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. = If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and = all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and = notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, = distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the = intended recipient. Wang Trading LLC and any of its subsidiaries each = reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its = networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the = individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the = sender is authorized to state them to be the views of any such entity. DISCLAIMER: This message is intended for the sole use of the individual to whom it = is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, = confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are = not the addressee you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, = disclose, or distribute to anyone the message or any information = contained in the message. If you have received this message in error, = please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete this = message.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_13B5_01C3838C.8AECCA20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hi!
 
I think putting your small tables to 2K = block size=20 is quite pointless (unless you have tens of thousands of these = tables=20 continously in buffer cache).
 
Tanel.
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Avnish.Rastogi@providence.o= rg=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, = 2003 8:54=20 PM
Subject: RE: Multiple block = sizes

I=20 have little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K = block =20 'cause Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in large = block=20 would help in reducing IO.  All the tables are in 8K block size = but=20 you can think about putting small tables in 2K or 4KB block = size to=20 better utilize your RAM. We are on AIX 5.1 , Oracle = 9202.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mladen Gogala=20 [mailto:mladen@wangtrading.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September = 24,=20 2003 9:05 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list=20 ORACLE-L
Subject: Multiple block = sizes

Does anybody=20 have any experience with the multiple block sizes in the database? = I'm about=20 to reconfigure
my = database to=20 have a tablespace with blocksize 16k in addition to the existing 8k=20 tablespaces. Tables
in = this=20 tablespace will be loaded weekly and read daily, frequently using = full table=20 scan (DW style reporting.
I'm planning to=20 have bitmap indexes and the rest of the DW arsenal). Does anybody = have any=20 negative experiences
with that kind=20 of stuff? It's 9.2.0.4 on RH 7.3. Am I running into ora-7445 and = ora-0600=20 type errors?
 
--
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
 
 
Note:
This message is for the named person's use only.  It may = contain=20 confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information.  = No=20 confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any = mistransmission. =20 If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete = it and=20 all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and = notify=20 the sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, = disclose,=20 distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not = the=20 intended recipient. Wang Trading=20 LLC and any of its subsidiaries each reserve = the right=20 to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.  Any = views=20 expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except = where=20 the message states otherwise and the sender is authorized to state = them to=20 be the views of any such entity.
 
 

DISCLAIMER:
This message is intended for the sole use of the = individual=20 to whom it is addressed, and may contain information that is = privileged,=20 confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you = are not=20 the addressee you are hereby notified that you may not use, copy, = disclose, or=20 distribute to anyone the message or any information contained in the = message.=20 If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise = the=20 sender by reply email and delete this message. =

------=_NextPart_000_13B5_01C3838C.8AECCA20-- -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net -- Author: Tanel Poder INET: tanel.poder.003@mail.ee 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@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).