RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

Performance of selects and non-direct path inserts. I no longer have the exact data as it was left at my former employer when I left. Significantly is relative -- it wasn't like performance went to the pots, I'm talking between about 5% and 10%. So a 1 minute query would run a couple seconds longer than expected.

And why? I don't know. That was one of the things I was going to look into. If only I had metalink access I could do some searching. Maybe I should try to recreate it in my current environment (Win2k, Oracle 9iR2 patchset 3)

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Jared.Still_at_radisys.com [mailto:Jared.Still_at_radisys.com] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2003 6:44 PM
To: ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com
Cc: ktoepke_at_tuningoracle.com
Subject: RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ?? Importance: High

Kevin,

Performance of what? SELECT, INSERT, DELETE, UPDATE?

And why?

Jared

"Kevin Toepke" <ktoepke_at_tuningoracle.com> Sent by: root_at_fatcity.com
 03/19/2003 03:43 AM
 Please respond to ORACLE-L

        To:     Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
        cc:
        Subject:        RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

Funny this came up. I had just finished doing research on this for a potential 9iRAC implemenation.

What I came up with from reading the docs and from experimentation is to keep the number of extents of each table and each indexes to less than 1024.
1024 seemed to be a majic number. Performance dropped significanty once you
got past that.

Keep the uniform size an exact multiple of the tablespace's (or database's)
block size.

Finaly, when you create a LMT, figure out the size you want and add 64k for
the bitmap.

My envionment was Sun Solaris 8, 9iR2; patchset 1.

HTH
Kevin

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 5:34 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Thanks Mogens.
but any "thumb of rule" to fix the UNIFORM SIZE in LMTs. how do u go about fixing the size ?!

Regards,
Jp.

2003/03/19 18:15:52, Mogens N?rgaard <mln_at_miracleas.dk> wrote:

>Go to LMT asap. Whether you want to use uniform sized extents in LMTs or
>system managed (or whatever it's called) is a matter of dispute. My
>personal opinion is for uniformed sizing.
>
>Mogens

--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Prem Khanna J
  INET: jprem_at_kssnet.co.jp

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).



--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Kevin Toepke
  INET: ktoepke_at_tuningoracle.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