Re: concepts document part about separating indexes and tablespaces

Hi Mary,

I remembered reading a blog by Richard Foote on this subject. Maybe that
will give you more or better arguments in the discussion.

http://richardfoote.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/separate-indexes-from-tables-some-thoughts-part-i-everything-in-its-right-place/

There are several entries on this subject in his blog. (I haven't read them
all, and at my current site as well as all the sites in my carreer have
separated the index and table tablespaces).

Regards,

Patrick

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Mary Elizabeth McNeely <
mary_mcneely@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I've gotten into this tiff with storage administrators at many a site.
>
>
>
> I have been informed by many of them that the "Oracle approved"
> disk layout is separate disks or separate disk pools for table and index
> access.  (I could probably find an Oracle document recommending ANYTHING as
> the approved way of doing something if I looked long enough.)  I've tried
> explaining that we are designing I/O for a multi-user system where I/O on
> various tables and their indexes would already be occurring concurrently (as
> Riyaj suggested earlier), so I didn't see much point in trying to separate
> the two.  So, instead, why don't we "even out" the I/O among the disks by
> striping what would have been the table and index disks, together?
>
>
>
> I must be some unfortunate combination of not very eloquent, not very
> polite, and/or not very persuasive, because the person in charge almost
> always goes with what the storage administrators say, considering my idea
> heretical.
>
>
>
> The last time I had this tiff, I lost because the storage administrator was
> convinced that if the layout performed poorly, the manufacturer of the disk
> array might not support any performance related issues we had, because we
> had such a "non-standard" layout (striping tables and indexes in the same
> stripe/stripes).  Sigh ...
>
> MEM
>
>
>  ----- Original Message ----
> From: William Wagman <wjwagman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Mark.Bobak@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ricks12345@xxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 3:32:45 PM
> Subject: RE: concepts document part about separating indexes and
> tablespaces
>
>  Greetings,
>
>
>
> I suspect this may date back to the "old days." I remember some years ago a
> statement, I believe it was in an Oracle Press book on oracle
> administration, that the ideal number of disks for a database was 28 (maybe
> not that many but close). This was in days when disks were smaller and
> performed differently. The idea was to spread things out across several
> disks, data, indexes, online redo logs, archive logs, undo, temp space, etc.
> so that I/O bottlenecks would be minimized. With today's faster and bigger
> (huger actually) disks this is not only less of an issue but difficult to
> do. How can you do that on a machine with 1 500GB disk? Why?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Bill Wagman
> Univ. of California at Davis
> IET Campus Data Center
> wjwagman@xxxxxxxxxxx
> (530) 754-6208
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Bobak, Mark
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 15, 2008 11:27 AM
> *To:* ricks12345@xxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* RE: concepts document part about separating indexes and
> tablspaces
>
>
>
> If it says that, someone should file a documentation bug to get it fixed.
>
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
> *--
> Mark J. Bobak*
> *Senior Database Administrator, System & Product Technologies*
> ProQuest
> 789 E. Eisenhower, Parkway, P.O. Box 1346
> Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346
> +1.734.997.4059  or +1.800.521.0600 x 4059
> mark.bobak@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mark.bobak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> www.proquest.com
> www.csa.com
>
> *ProQuest...*Start here.
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Rick Ricky
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 15, 2008 2:17 PM
> *To:* oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* concepts document part about separating indexes and tablspaces
>
>
>
> i was talking to someone about this today. I cannot remember where in the
> Concepts document that it says that separating data from indexes improves
> performances?
>

Other related posts: