Re: Oracle much slower than DB2?

Just a thought ... but is it possible that the Oracle version is suffering from row migration? That is, PCTFREE was set too low causing each block to be fully packed with rows. Then, the arithmetic that was applied to the numeric values caused the row to become too big to fit into the block, etc.

Considering the scheme that Oracle uses for numeric values, it's not surprising that it would take longer than the DB/2 scheme (which is probably closer to 'native' processor schemes). DB/2 uses a fixed size for numeric values whereas Oracle uses a variable-length packed format with only enough space occupied to fit the currently assigned numeric value.

However, I'd expect I/O time to vastly outweigh any calculation & reformatting time.

Steve Parfitt

Burkhard Schultheis wrote:
>
> Martin Haltmayer schrieb:
> >
> > These are way too small.
> >
> > Add new redo logs with at least 100 MB size each and drop the existing ones.
> > Then please retry.
> >
> > Martin
> >
>
> Now I've tried it with 3 100 MB redo logs. The time is now 3.4 s. It's
> still too slow!
>
> Grüße,
> --
> Burkhard Schultheis
> Tele Data Electronic
> Wagnerstr. 10
> D-76448 Durmersheim
>
> Email: schultheis_at_tde-online.de
> Phone: +49-7245-9287-21
> Fax: +49-7245-9287-30
Received on Sat Jul 21 2001 - 16:27:39 CDT