RE: Block size or replication?

From: Ashish Shah <ar_shah_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <10534.109853@fatcity.com>

I suggest you should go with replication. We do it here and it works like a charm..

Ashish

• "Singla, Sanjeev" <SSingla_at_oxhp.com> wrote:
  > If u increase the block size and u are using Oracle
  > parallel server then
  > there can be
  > potential issues of pinging the blocks accross
  > nodes. Because with one block
  > read into the
  > SGA there will be more records locked by the
  > instance. There can be
  > potential concurrency
  > and performance issues. But if u are single instance
  > Oracle and u are
  > running mixed jobs
  > (OLTP+Batch( then u can be better off with
  > increasing the block size))
  > Another solution is to maitain a standby database
  > (provided u r in Oracle
  > 8.x) which will automatically
  > get refershed with the archive logs and whenever u
  > want u can open it for
  > batch (read only jobs).
  > But keep in mind to create ur temporary tablespace
  > as locally managed.
  > Because dictionary will be
  > in read only mode and ur reporting may need some
  > temp sorts.
  >
  > Cheers
  > Sanjeev
  >
  > -----Original Message-----
  > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 11:07 AM
  > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
  >
  >
  > We have an OLTP system that has frequent long
  > running Crystal Reports
  > reports that affect the overall online performance.
  > We are looking at ways
  > to improve response time. This is a purchased app
  > and we do not modify
  > code. We are looking at doing replication to
  > offload some of the
  > processing. But I am wondering if increasing the
  > blocksize would be a
  > better solution. The ad-hoc reports often do full
  > table scans, as do the
  > OLTP programs. This is even though there are
  > indexes available. Remember
  > we don't change code. The current block size is
  > 4096. I would like to
  > change it to 8192. I am thinking this would cut
  > full table scan i/o in half
  > and speed up processing. Any ideas?
  >
  > Ron Smith
  > Database Administration
  > rlsmith_at_kmg.com
  >
  >
  > --
  > Author: Smith, Ron L.
  > INET: rlsmith_at_kmg.com
  >
  > Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX:
  > (858) 538-5051
  > San Diego, California -- Public Internet
  > access / Mailing Lists
  >
  

  ---

  
  > 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).
  > --
  > Author: Singla, Sanjeev
  > INET: SSingla_at_oxhp.com
  >
  > Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX:
  > (858) 538-5051
  > San Diego, California -- Public Internet
  > access / Mailing Lists
  >
  

  ---

  
  > 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).
  

  ---

Ashish
Toronto, Canada

---

Received on Tue Jun 20 2000 - 10:09:15 CDT