RE: LOL: 122 one column indexes on 122 column table
- From: Laimutis Nedzinskas <laimutis.nedzinskas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 07:32:06 +0000
Considering we had heavy inserts/updates on that table, performance was less
than desirable.
Well, less than desirable in my case was 0.5 seconds average for insert - man
can type a word in that time. This is on good servers and good storage.
Bumping the block cache tenfold has helped but storage is storage: people
forget that storage is either a mechanical device (!) - yes, XXI century
computers are still based on mechanics or flash which one might say is quantum
mechanics ;)
/Laimis N
From: Sandra Becker [
mailto:sbecker6925@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 10:00 PM
To: Laimutis Nedzinskas
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: LOL: 122 one column indexes on 122 column table
Laimis,
I've seen worse. It was a 3rd-party app. 256 column table had over 2,500
indexes. After monitoring for a month, we discovered that only a dozen of the
indexes were ever used. Vendor wouldn't allow us to remove the unused indexes.
Considering we had heavy inserts/updates on that table, performance was less
than desirable.
Sandy
On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Laimutis Nedzinskas
<laimutis.nedzinskas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<
mailto:laimutis.nedzinskas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
Hi..
I thought I’d seen all.
Not even close:
122 column table.
122 one-column indexes on EACH column.
(BLOBs I don’t count, let them be)
That’s…rude.
/Laimis N
--
Sandy B.
Other related posts: