RE: Oracle Book Mal-practice...

  • From: "Schauss, R. Peter (IT Solutions)" <peter.schauss@xxxxxxx>
  • To: "Oracle L" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 15:07:00 -0500

FWIW, I have a heavily used 36gb SQL Server database on which I quietly
stopped reorganizing the indexes more than two years ago.  I have had no
performance complaints on this database which could be traced back to
the database.  If you read the SQL Server list on Lazy DBA everyone
recommends periodic reorganizing of indexes.

- Peter Schauss

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Robert Freeman
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 3:21 PM
To: rjoralist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Oracle L
Subject: Re: Oracle Book Mal-practice...

Interesting thoughts on SQL Server... I'm starting a bit of a surface
self-education on SQL Server. It's interesting how I'm hearing things
about it that sound so similar to the Oracle 7 days....Give 'em 10 more
years and maybe the "expert" maturity will be such that they will have
the same "Old" days discussions that we do.



 Robert G. Freeman
Oracle ACE
OCP: Oracle Database 11g Administrator Certified Professional Study
Guide (Sybex) Oracle Database 11g New Features (Oracle Press) Portable
DBA: Oracle  (Oracle Press) Oracle Database 10g New Features (Oracle
Press) Oracle9i RMAN Backup and Recovery (Oracle Press) Oracle9i New
Features (Oracle Press) Other various titles out of print now...
The LDS Church is looking for DBA's. You do have to be a Church member
in good standing. A lot of kind people write me, concerned I may be
breaking the law by saying you have to be a Church member. It's legal I
promise! :-)

----- Original Message ----
From: Rich Jesse <rjoralist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Oracle L <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:42:42 PM
Subject: RE: Oracle Book Mal-practice...

In a way, the "malpractice" in those kinds of books helps me, at least
Oracle, which I've worked with for 12+ years now.  Like the idea of
rebuilding indexes, which came up recently.  I believe from past
and research that b-tree index rebuilding in Oracle is usually
But when tasked with "It'll save space, so why not?", I chose to bolster
belief using other trusted sources (this list's and Tom Kyte's many
among them) and use this information to back my assertion.  The
"malpractice" of index rebuilding refreshed my understanding of Oracle's
b-tree indexes.  This is a good thing for me as a "solo" DBA.

OTOH, my <2yrs experience with SQueaL Server is leading me to find all
of questionable information as to how to properly maintain that fine
for an enterprise database.  For example, based on information given on
several websites (including documentation), it seems that SS suffers
some sort of entropy where time and data contribute to poor performance,
index page corruption, and fragmentation within the table structure
disk thrashing, but all only if indexes are not regularly rebuilt or at
least reorg'd.  Really?  Can someone show me how these theorems were

The difference between these is that I consider myself to be a Sr-level
Oracle and only a Jr in SS land.  But that doesn't mean I should blindly
accept any and all advice given for either.  It just makes it more
to catch all of the BS as a Jr.  And I've missed a few well-flung pieces

My $.02,

Disclaimer:  I like Fridays.

> The next version of the book should indicate that table and index data
> separated onto different solid state drives or ram modules when in
memory :)
> Seriously these conversations give me such a headache, and usually I
am able
> to point to the source being out of date, like a website that hasn't
> updated since 1997. But this is made even more difficult with current
> sources (books/site/articles etc.) perpetuating these myths.
> On the other hand if everyone learned the proper way to design,
> test, tune and run their systems, the best dba's/developers among us
> be common and our rate/salaries would reflect that.



Other related posts: