Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: RH Linux 8 vs Windows XP -- Question...
unix filesystem is bad suited for database operations
the only good thing is KAIO on raw devices
oracle on windows uses direct io without buffering, but on unix you use filesystem buffering by default
on linux you can use raw devices to advoid buffering, but KAIO is not available
with oracle 10g you can avoid these problems altogether because the software
contains now
volume manager software and you avoid the overhead of filesystems without
the problems
of raw devices
this high expensive veritas crap with volume manager, filesystem and quick IO is then unnecessary
then oracle on linux should be better than windows
"Jan van Mourik" <jmourik_at_yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ffe966de.0309211236.41025f04_at_posting.google.com...
> Gentlemen...
>
> I'm wondering if anybody has encountered something similar...
> I'm running Tom Kyte's script to create BIG_TABLE on two play
> databases I run, one on RH Linux 8, one on XP. They have been
> configured similarly, init.ora parameters are pretty much the same.
> Yet, look at these tkprof snippets:
>
> XP
> INSERT /*+ APPEND */ into big_table
> select rownum+:b1,
> OWNER, OBJECT_NAME, SUBOBJECT_NAME,
> OBJECT_ID, DATA_OBJECT_ID,
> OBJECT_TYPE, CREATED, LAST_DDL_TIME,
> TIMESTAMP, STATUS, TEMPORARY,
> GENERATED, SECONDARY
> from big_table
> where rownum <= :b2-:b1
>
> call count cpu elapsed disk query current
> rows
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> Execute 6 5.37 10.97 8365 14635 2133
> 970885
> Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> total 7 5.37 10.97 8365 14635 2133
> 970885
>
> versus Linux:
>
> call count cpu elapsed disk query current
> rows
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> Execute 6 12.81 33.79 7601 14635 2130
> 970482
> Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> total 7 12.82 33.79 7601 14635 2130
> 970482
>
> Roughly the same number of rows, but a big difference in cpu and
> elapsed. XP is much faster!!!
> When I run the workload simulation setup from Kyte's book 'Effective
> Oracle by design' (p. 314) the linux box beats the pants of the XP.
> But loading the table is a lot slower. Makes me wonder if something in
> my Linux setup is bad...
> Any ideas?
>
> jan
Received on Sun Sep 21 2003 - 16:51:00 CDT