RE: Performance BIGFILE contra SMALLFILE tablespaces
- From: "Marco Gralike" <Marco.Gralike@xxxxxxx>
- To: "Kevin Closson" <ora_kclosson@xxxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:24:02 +0200
Neither Kevin,
just a good old fashion EXT3 linux.
I am interested in the internal "book keeping". I have huge performance
problems during my tests with XMLType Binary XML Securefile storage
and/or with "COMPRESS HIGH" and I want to figure out if it is problem
related to the "BIGFILE" / "SMALLFILE"
Cheers
Marco
________________________________
From: Kevin Closson [mailto:ora_kclosson@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: woensdag 16 juli 2008 20:50
To: Marco Gralike; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Performance BIGFILE contra SMALLFILE tablespaces
Raw partition or CFS?
----- Original Message ----
From: Marco Gralike <Marco.Gralike@xxxxxxx>
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:32:32 AM
Subject: Performance BIGFILE contra SMALLFILE tablespaces
Has anyone any idea if there is a difference in performance between
BIGFILE / SMALLFILE tablespaces on a normal harddisk (so no ASM etc)
Thanks in advance
Marco
Other related posts:
