RE: Any performance benefits in going to db_16k_cache_size or db_32k_cache_size
- From: Tanel Poder <tanel.poder.003@xxxxxxx>
- To: cary.millsap@xxxxxxxxxx, mark.powell@xxxxxxx, oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 00:35:49 +0800
Yeah, I agree with Cary and Mark and would add a comment that a tricky thing
like changing block size (thinking about granularity of buffer locking)
should be tested with simulating real concurrency.
E.g. your single session index lookup might run faster due lower index
height, but on the other hand you could have more buffer busy waits in
high-concurrency environments, etc..
Tanel.
_____
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Cary Millsap
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 00:13
To: mark.powell@xxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Any performance benefits in going to db_16k_cache_size or
db_32k_cache_size
I have the same opinion as the one Mark describes here.
One more comment: Why guess, when you can KNOW.
If you need to know, test it, and measure the performance.
Other related posts:
