Re: stop chugging hard drive

"Brian Peasland" <oracle_dba_at_nospam.peasland.net> wrote in message news:IxMG3y.77r_at_igsrsparc2.er.usgs.gov...
>> No it isn't anything like that.
>
> Are you 100% sure....there's lots going on here. Lots of automated
> collection and storing of data in 10g. It could be many things. What makes
> you so sure I'm wrong?

I have installed the same version of 10g on three machines. I remember selecting a single different option on the oldest machine which didn't "chug".

That had the lowest spec - lowest memory, slowest hard drive. The only substantive differences were:
1. The option I chose on setup
2. It had Windows Home instead of Pro.

It was just a "quickie" question. I thought those who set the DB up regularly on PC's would instantly know the issue. Particularly when I vaguly remembered the option was to do with "recovery/archiving" and its one of the very few questions the setup actually "asks".

>> It's an option I chose when installing the database. Something
>> straightforward, like to do with archiving.....but I just can't remember.
>
> There is an option which lets you set the database in archive log mode or
> not. In archive log mode, when the online redo log fills up, it gets
> copied to the archive log destination. Without archivelog mode, the
> contents of the online redo log simply get overwritten, never to be seen
> again. Archive logging can have performance impacts, especially if all I/O
> is on the same drive.

Yes, thats probably it. The simplest - no need to investigate Hard drive failure, the version of Oracle etc etc etc etc A simple straightforward solution that I can try - without wasting too much of your time helping me out - which was the point of keeping my question dead simple - or I thought thats what I was doing.

>> One alternative causes the "chugging" the other doesn't.
>
> That could be the cause, or it might not be. Turn off archiving and see if
> the chugging goes away. But in any case, this has nothing to do with, as
> you said, "I had turned off rollback segments or redo logs" because you
> cannot turn off all undo (rollback) segments and all online redo logs.
> This are quite different animals than archiving the online redo logs.
>
>> I installed on two v. similar machines with the different results. The
>> old machine, which doesn't chug, is kaput at the moment so I can't check
>> out the difference.
>
> Why is the machine "kaput"? Is it a harddrive failure? Or some other
> reason?
>

Some other reason. Motherboard failure.

>> I thought someone would just say "turn archiving off with XYZ" or
>> similar.
>
> Then let me say it...."turn off archiving"!!! You now have a definitive
> answer to help solve your problem.
>
> I have absolutely no idea if archiving could be causing your problem as
> your problem could have other root causes that have nothing to do with
> archiving. For instance, if your machine is "kaput" due to a harddrive
> failure, then the root cause is probably due to bad hardware. IDE drives
> tend to "chug" when they are about ready to up and die.

That machine didn't chug and and didn't for the previous two years.

Of course, I'm
> assuming you are using an IDE drive, but I can do nothing but assume
> because you did not provide any details to help further diagnose your
> problem.
>
>> As I said, when I have a bit of time I'll sort it out as no one can
>> provide a straightforward
>> solution.
>
> There is not a single person who can say with 100%, 99%, or even 90%
> certainty that your problem is caused by XYZ. That is because you have not
> provided enough details to help us help you solve your problem.

I gave a big clue as to what I thought it was. As I said it was just a quickie question which is turning into something silly.

> You have come to this group seeking its expertise. When someone asked you
> for more information, it is because their expertise tells them that they
> need more information to help you out.

IMO they didn't need it. I was trying to keep it simple for them, so they didn't get put off by having to search for obscure and esoteric solutions.

It was a "newbie" type issue. No complicated solution was/is required IMO.

As you say it may be (99% certain is) as simple as turning on/off X or Y.

>Yet your reply is "I dont think any of those facts are relevant" and "No it
>isn't anything like that". If you feel your expertise level is higher than
>those whom counsel you seek, they why post the question?

See above.

>I don't go to the doctor and complain of a constant headache then after the
>doctor asks me if anything has changed at work lately, reply "I dont think
>any of those facts are relevant". Apparently the doctor asked me about my
>life at work because that information may be relevant. Or it may not be
>relevant. If I told the doctor that they recently repainted my office, he
>might suspect allergies. If I told the doctor I was under the pressure of a
>major deadline, he might suspect stress as the cause. If I told the doctor
>the only that has changed at work is that I got a 10% payraise, he'd
>probably decide that my professional life was not a factor of the root
>cause. You've effectively gone to the doctor and then refused to help him
>correctly diagnose your ailment.

If you had banged your head the previous day. then I doubt whether he would have asked you if you were under prerssure at work. You would have provided him with the most straightforward issue - the fact that you had banged your head. He would have given you a bit of credit (in the first instance) to realise you would have presented him with the most apposite facts - and he would have treated you on that basis. He wouldn't go looking for allergies to explain the symptoms of a headache when you had banged your head the previous day - and no I'm not a doctor.

That is what I did narrowing the problem down to a single different option that I had selected on setup - which I couldn't remember the specifics of.

I was expecting a reply like - "Oh that's probably archiving. Go into EM shut the DB down. Switch off blah blah blah" But instead it's turned into War and Peace. ;-) Received on Thu Apr 13 2006 - 06:28:41 CDT