RE: Question on diff block sizes in DB
- From: "Lex de Haan" <lex.de.haan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 11:41:20 +0200
the support for multiple block sizes is not meant for this purpose
(performance)
but it is not forbidden, of course. the biggest disadvantage is that you
have to
segregate the cache, which typically leads to more maintenance and less
optimal memory usage.
I have no real life experience, but I would go for a single block size ...
for what it is worth,
Kind regards,
Lex.
---------------------------------------------
visit my website at http://www.naturaljoin.nl <http://www.naturaljoin.nl>
---------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mike Schmitt
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 22:50
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Question on diff block sizes in DB
Hello list,
I was wandering if anyone had any experience or recommendations for the
following. We will be implementing a database that will be similar to a
small warehouse having some tables that will be fairly well partitioned and
be sized/grow 17G a year. Along with these we will have some smaller
lookup tables that we do not know the sizes of. I looked over the
suggested spec today and had some questions related to using different
database block sizes within the database (database will be 9.2.0.4)
All Data and Index Tablespaces reside on: 32k block size tablespaces, 256k
VM I/O read size, 64k strip width on SAN (SAN stuck at 64k strip size),
with db_file_multiblock_read_count of 8
All System, Temp, undo, lookup table tablespaces reside on: 8k block size
tablespaces, 64k VM I/O read size, 64k strip width size on SAN (SAN stuck
at 64k strip size), with db_file_multiblock_read_count of 8
Since the system will not be using transportable tablespaces, is there much
of a benefit to separating this data into different block sizes. I
initially felt that since we were only dealing with the System tablespace
and a group of lookup tables, the design/administration would be easier to
keep everything uniform(block size, VM IO). I also felt that we should at
least use the 32k block size for the temp tablespace and possibly Undo
tablespace as well.
Since I do not have any experience with using databases with different
block sizes, I was hoping someone might share their experience and give
advice against what has been spec'd
Much appreciated
Thanks
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
-- Type: text/x-vcard
-- File: Lex de Haan.vcf
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
