Thanks Wolfgang ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wolfgang Breitling" <breitliw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 1:12 PM Subject: Re: Your opinion please :) keep in the goal > OK, mine will be some criticism. First off I should mention that I am > biased from the get-go because I despise laundry lists. If you can put it > into a checklist, why not put it into a program or script and let the > computer do it. They are good at repetitive tasks. > > Another reason I am against such lists is that they get outdated very fast, > but tend to still get followed, especially if their target is novice DBAs > who can not distinguish between truth and myth. > > Some concrete beefs I have with your paper: > > - you write that optimizer_index_caching and optimizer_index_cost_adj "must > be set". Everytime I hear or read absolutes like that, alarmbells go off > for me. I can give you examples, or create ones at the drop of a hat where > any lowering of those two values from their default will create disastrous > access paths. > > - you write that "setting optimizer_max_parmutations=80000 indicates there > is no limit" and somewhere else that "columns with [predominant] null > values should be put at the end of a table to save space". Did or can you > prove that? I believe both statements are false, but have not spend any > time researching if I am right. > > Enough of that. This is my 101 of tuning: > a) a performance problem must be raised and identified from a business > perspective - some business process is taking so long that it has a > negative, pecuniary impact on the business > b) together with that, a tuning goal must be identified in terms that are > measurable > c) armed with the concrete business process that needs tuning you start to > break it down into smaller components and at every step look for the > components that take the longest, either doing something, or waiting for > something. E.g. if the process consists of a sequence of SQL, you > concentrate on the sql that takes the longest and look at the sqltrace > (with wait stats) to identify where it spends its time. Or it could be that > it is not a single sql, but the fact the application (programmer) decided > he could do a nested loop faster than Oracle and fires off several hundred > or thousand sql for each employee, department, account, or whatever the > program is dealing with (don't laugh, I see it all the time). > The appropriate tuning measure depends on that analysis. Then you repeat > the process, always picking the "cream of the crop" until the identified > performance is reached. THEN STOP!! > > At 06:15 AM 2/27/2004, you wrote: > >Thanks for your good and bad opinions, but I would like to remember you > >please, the idea > >to give you the paper is to get ideas what more I can add there, > >what do you think should be in the paper (obviously briefly) and you can't > >see in there now. > >Or if you see some error, or something to improve. > > Wolfgang Breitling > Oracle7, 8, 8i, 9i OCP DBA > Centrex Consulting Corporation > http://www.centrexcc.com > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------