Re: TEMP tablespace: a big one or 10 small ones?

<schonlinner_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1126686836.529573.152920_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> we have an Oracle 10g database on a HP/UX machine (parallel queries
> enabled). Users access the database and perform selects on the tables,
> sometimes very large selects. Additionally during monthly production
> huge amounts of data need to be put into the database. Currently the
> database is not productive, we are only testing...
>
> I first created a single 30GB temp tablespace for the database and
> measured the performance of queries. After that I created 10
> 3-GB-temp-tablespaces and assigned them to a tablespace group, and
> assigned the tablespace group as a temporary tablespace to the user
> executing the queries. The performance then was slightly better.
>

Mmm ... I don't quite understand why the performance of the small tablespaces was better than using 1 big tablespace - were all tablespaces created on the same disks ? I guess you could see performance improvements if you have different temp tablespaces on different disks ? Received on Wed Sep 14 2005 - 14:45:20 CDT