RE: Multiple Block Size

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_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> To: <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> 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_at_yahoo.com>
>> Subject: RE: Multiple Block Size
>>
>> Prashant,
>> www.dba-oracle.com/oracle_tips_multiple_blocksizes.htm
>>
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l