Return-Path: Delivered-To: 2-oracle-l@orafaq.com Received: (qmail 12662 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2008 21:50:19 -0600 Received: from freelists-180.iquest.net (HELO turing.freelists.org) (206.53.239.180) by static-ip-69-64-49-119.inaddr.intergenia.de with SMTP; 5 Mar 2008 21:50:19 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 408C7818A81; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:50:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11198-04; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:50:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id AF0C8818728; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:50:18 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:14:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 2E546817DD5 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:14:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07836-04 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:14:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com (hu-out-0506.google.com [72.14.214.228]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 89400817DA5 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:14:11 -0500 (EST) Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 19so1181780hue.21 for ; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:14:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=9towLLyUmnT99Fq+hmZgNsaxB5PGZINm4SllVIwLBB0=; b=J3ZnV6W0GIIPn/MLCH8eVtjzett04Cucv9xXIMQqqLeGEGl7+ijdQo6P+Rv93cWkBwQ7QIs0yWUejLQa5x0zdwDwTd+pXOHHoc+sZ7f2wSEYP9Z2mBJHhXeQr5LX6U6mKGdDu826+nRlPJRmmRIFguNdP7Fu1ia6SsBwXcztYPY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=tp/WMtxYQyTYDjx0qUREONkUqqk+IA7udDKCEOP3W0mbQNur8MVwQKgcqQwMMVnSMWnYCuJaQNB8itYDi8dsE3L1oIaRo+kGbgxDt4OwiKsgpeRFzwStC5KJMQQE/xNDg2tzbkSFferce3U9iJaUVVxbrih+TEFwSx+AjmQpUyM= Received: by 10.86.66.19 with SMTP id o19mr3988847fga.10.1204773250723; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:14:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.9.12 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 19:14:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <910046b40803051914k7c531f36t370ab879b438ba1f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:14:10 -0500 From: "Paul Drake" To: WLJohnson@tycoelectronics.com Subject: Re: Log file sync and log file parallel write. Cc: "Jared Still" , asif_oracle@yahoo.com, oracle-l@freelists.org In-Reply-To: <70C6CD0D975AFC43859A976DFD98C2FE0757C780@us194mx20.tycoelectronics.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_30100_30756110.1204773250721" References: <70C6CD0D975AFC43859A976DFD98C2FE073E026A@us194mx20.tycoelectronics.net> <489203.90609.qm@web56610.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <70C6CD0D975AFC43859A976DFD98C2FE0757C780@us194mx20.tycoelectronics.net> X-archive-position: 6046 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: bdbafh@gmail.com Precedence: normal Reply-to: bdbafh@gmail.com List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: oracle-l X-List-ID: oracle-l List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain ------=_Part_30100_30756110.1204773250721 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Johnson, William L (TEIS) < WLJohnson@tycoelectronics.com> wrote: > Can someone help point me to documentation that will show me the silver > bullet for not rebuilding indexes? I can provide countless examples over > the past several years where rebuilding indexes corrected performance > problems that developed over months. Are we saying that something else > fixed the problem and that the index rebuild was not the real solution? Is > the index rebuild forcing explain plans out of the shared_pool and giving > false results? If so, wouldn't a DB stop/start accomplish the same result? > I am by no means an optimizing expert, but won't Oracle switch to something > like full table scans if the index is no longer an effective method to > obtain your data? This quickly becomes a problem when joining multiple > tables with 10+ million rows each. I deal a lot with third party > applications like SAP, Click Commerce and Matrix One Engineering modules > where we can not alter the sql running behind the scenes. > > > > I would really like to understand. > > > > Bill > Bill, It depends. Did the clustering factor change? ;P ducking, running and signing off for the night... Pd > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Jared Still [mailto:jkstill@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:39 PM > *To:* asif_oracle@yahoo.com > *Cc:* Johnson, William L (TEIS); oracle-l@freelists.org > *Subject:* Re: Log file sync and log file parallel write. > > > > > Lastly, why are you rebuilding your indexes??? > Regards > Asif Momen > http://momendba.blogspot.com > > > > > > Same question. Why are you rebuilding the indexes? > > You *could* just stop doing that. > > -- > Jared Still > Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist > -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- USADA and WADA are broken and not worth fixing. Boycott professional sports. Avoid patronizing their advertisers. Don't buy tickets to NBA, NFL, MLBB, NHL and especially Pro Cycling. ------=_Part_30100_30756110.1204773250721 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Johnson, William L (TEIS) <WLJohnson@tycoelectronics.com> wrote:

Can someone help point me to documentation that will show me the silver bullet for not rebuilding indexes?  I can provide countless examples over the past several years where rebuilding indexes corrected performance problems that developed over months.  Are we saying that something else fixed the problem and that the index rebuild was not the real solution?  Is the index rebuild forcing explain plans out of the shared_pool and giving false results?  If so, wouldn't a DB stop/start accomplish the same result?  I am by no means an optimizing expert, but won't Oracle switch to something like full table scans if the index is no longer an effective method to obtain your data?  This quickly becomes a problem when joining multiple tables with 10+ million rows each.   I deal a lot with third party applications like SAP, Click Commerce and Matrix One Engineering modules where we can not alter the sql running behind the scenes.

 

I would really like to understand.

 

Bill

Bill,

It depends.
Did the clustering factor change? ;P

ducking, running and signing off for the night...

Pd

 

From: Jared Still [mailto:jkstill@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:39 PM
To: asif_oracle@yahoo.com
Cc: Johnson, William L (TEIS); oracle-l@freelists.org
Subject: Re: Log file sync and log file parallel write.

 


Lastly, why are you rebuilding your indexes???
Regards
Asif Momen
http://momendba.blogspot.com

 



Same question. Why are you rebuilding the indexes?

You *could* just stop doing that.

--
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist




--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
USADA and WADA are broken and not worth fixing. Boycott professional sports. Avoid patronizing their advertisers. Don't buy tickets to NBA, NFL, MLBB, NHL and especially Pro Cycling. ------=_Part_30100_30756110.1204773250721-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l