| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> Re: Oracle Slower than Access?
> This being the case, why are rollback segments used when inserting
> rows into an empty tablespace? Are the empty blocks/extents, etc
> copied from an empty tablespace to the rollback segments?
>
> Shucks, now I gotta go crack open the admin books and read...
>
Good question. I seem to remember Chen-Jih being correct though.
Additional points on Access vs. Oracle:
Access is Microsoft's End User database tool, Visual FoxPro is their commercial database development tool.
Neither Access nor VFP retrieve data via SQL unless they are being used
to front-end SQL Server, Oracle, or some other database server through
ODBC. Each table is an OS file. They retrieve file blocks from the
disk. On the machine the database is local to, this alone would improve
performance. On a network this is a nightmare, because if the
application does a query the entire file(s) for the table(s) being
queried and their index(es) must be read by the workstation. This
creates significantly greater network traffic than the query being done
on the server and the results being passed back to the workstation. In
short... running Access against Access tables as a client/server
solution will slow everyone on the network down.
--
Best!
Randall
[Just my Dog and I at the Edge of the Universe]
 |
 |