RE: RAC and table partitioning
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 23:10:02 -0400
Message-ID: <860iakw3h70upi6mjvmkadx7.1341889551238_at_email.android.com>
If you're asking cause you want to know if it's worth the trouble, well, that's hard to say. It's possible your workload won't reach a high enough level to matter. But, if it does, things can go bad VERY quickly. In my experience, an effective partitioning strategy, that includes indexes as well as tables, can have a huge impact. In my case, an order of magnitude or more was achieved.
In my opinion, for non-trivial workloads, a workload partitioning strategy is essential.
Hope that helps,
-Mark
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note™, an AT&T LTE smartphone
- Original message -------- Subject: RAC and table partitioning From: Vasu <vasudevanr_at_gmail.com> To: "oracle-l_at_freelists.org" <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> CC: RAC and table partitioning
Common sense says "data usage on RAC nodes- aligned to table partitions
" should do better.
Say, a table list partitioned on state column, thus dividing Txn activity
of major states such as NY and CA into 2 different partitions.
App is serviced by 2 node RAC, and all NY customers are served thru node-1
, and CA customers thru node-2
Simple data load comparison shows that cluster-waits are more in the mixed
workload scheme.
My question is : Has anyone seen significant/dramatic performance gains by aligning application usage to table partitioning ? If so, what was the gain % (though it would largely depend on the workload , h/w etc )
Thanks in advance.
-Vasu
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Mon Jul 09 2012 - 22:10:02 CDT