RE: Multiple Block Size
- From: "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:11:38 -0000
Just received a correction from Steve Adams.
The checkpoint queue appeared in 8.0, not 8.1
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
Author: Cost Based Oracle: Fundamentals
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/cbo_book/ind_book.html
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: oracle-l Digest V3 #373
Prashant,
Before recommending that link again, you might like to think carefully
about the quality of the content. Here's just one small example of how
erroneous it is:
By segregating high activity tables into a separate, smaller data buffer,
Oracle has far less RAM frames to scan for dirty block, improving the
throughout and also reducing CPU consumption. This is especially
important for super-high update tables with more than 100 row changes per
second.
Since Oracle 8.1, dirty blocks go on to the checkpoint queue the moment
they are made dirty - and they stay in place on that queue until the database
writer has written them; and DBWR picks them off the queue in the correct
order without having to scan the buffer. That's why you see far fewer
"checkpoint not complete" errors, and how the fast_start_mttr_target
can be made to work.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
Author: Cost Based Oracle: Fundamentals
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/cbo_book/ind_book.html
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 22:51:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Murtuja Khokhar <murtuja_oracle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Multiple Block Size
Prashant,
www.dba-oracle.com/oracle_tips_multiple_blocksizes.htm
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
