Nice observation Chris, and I suspect quite common, especially if you also include sites where the hardware cache does the same job. Also 'accidentally'. On 7/10/07, Chris Dunscombe <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi, One situation I've experienced was a smallish (< 250GB) third-party online operational database on Solaris where the OS cache acted as a cache for Full Table scans of tables around the 100-300 MB size. This worked well although it was more by accident than design. Cheers, Chris Quoting Robyn <robyn.sands@xxxxxxxxx>: > Thank you Mark and Brandon, > > This is the kind of information I'm looking for; I've read Steve's stuff but > it's been a while and the AIX paper is new to me. I *think* we need to make > some changes in our approach, but right now, I just want to gather and study > as much information on the different options and approaches as possible. > > So, if anyone has additional links, documents or experiences, I'd appreciate > the input. > > thank you ... Robyn > > On 7/9/07, Allen, Brandon < Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I'd be curious to hear anyone's reasons for preferring OS cache to DB >> cache. >> >> It seems pretty clear cut to me that it is better to allow Oracle to >> manage its own cache since it has much more knowledge available internally >> to help predict which blocks are most likely to be needed again. I've had >> good results with CIO (Concurrent, a.k.a non-buffered, non-inode-locking >> I/O) on AIX, but I did increase db_cache_size to make up for the lack of >> filesystem buffering - in one case from 600M to 1500M, in another I just >> used CIO from the beginning so there was no before/after comparison, but >> performance has been excellent with CIO. In the case where I switched from >> regular, buffered I/O to CIO and increased db_cache_size from 600M to 1500M, >> the performance of a fixed set of batch jobs improved from an average >> runtime of 166 minutes to 129 minutes - so a 22% reduction in runtime, but >> it's difficult to say how much of that improvement was from switching to CIO >> and how much was just due to the increase in db_cache_size alone. >> >> Here's a great paper specifically on AIX CIO for more info: >> http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/aix/whitepapers/db_perf_aix.pdf >> Chris Dunscombe www.christallize.com -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
-- Niall Litchfield Oracle DBA http://www.orawin.info